THE JAIN AGAMS

Author in Hindi :  Shri Dalsukh Malvania

Translated by:     Dr. Nagin Shah

 

Contents

(1) Explanation

(2) Obstructions to their Preservation

(3) Recensions

(4) Works Composed on the basis of the Purvas

(5) A List of the Jain Agam Works

(6) Age of the Composition of the agams

(7) Subject Matter of the Agams (55)

(8) Commentaries on the Agams (56)

 

 

Chapter I  -             Top

Explanation

Authorship - Authorlessness

The Agams, also called the Jain Shrut, are as important in the Jain

Dharma as are the Vedas in Brahmanic religion and the Pitakas in

Buddhism.  The thinkers of the Mimamsa branch of Brahman philosophy

considered the Vedas to be eternal and hence demonstrated them to be

authorless, while the thinkers of the Nyaya-Vaishesik and the other

branches of the same philosophy maintained and demonstrated that the

Vedas are composed by God.  But if we ponder a little over these two

views, we at once realize that the purpose behind them is one and the

same.  It suggests that the date of the composition of the Vedas was

not known.  On the other hand, the Buddhist Tripitakas and the Jain

Agams were composed by human beings, not by ‘God,’ and their date of

composition is known to history.

 

Man loves what is old.  This was one of the reasons why the Vedas were

believed to be authorless.  Some might have run down the Jain Agams,

saying that they are new and have no ancient basis.  To this the Jain

reply was that our twelve Anga Agams (an ‘Anga’ being a ‘limb’),

collectively called Dvadsangi or Ganipitaka, were at all times in the

past, are in the present, and will be at all times in the future. 

They are eternal, firm, permanent, non-destructive, non-decaying and

everlasting’ (1).

The logic behind this Jain answer is as follows:

From the transcendental standpoint, Truth is one.  However from the

standpoint of different time, space and human beings, it is manifested

in various ways, but through all these manifestations there runs one

eternal truth.

If we concentrate on the eternal truth and pay no attention to its

various manifestations, then we must say that any person who has

conquered attachment and aversion, and thus become a Jina always

preaches the eternal truth about conduct, equanimity, universal

affection and friendship, and the eternal truths on thinking, namely,

the principle of relativity, principle of non-onesideness.  There is

no time when there is an absence of this eternal truth.  Hence, from

this standpoint, the Jain Agams can well be described as beginningless

and endless, that is, they are as authorless as are the Vedas.

At one place (2) it is said that there is a vast difference among the

body structures of the twenty four Tirthankars, beginning with Lord

Rishabha and ending with Lord Mahavir.  However, there is no

difference whatsoever with regard to their endurance, body

composition, wisdom, omniscience, and so on.  Hence there cannot be

any difference in their preaching.

Another point worthy of note is that all the modes of all the things

that are to be preached are beginningless and endless.  The totality

of all the modes; past, present, and future, of all things is always

the same.  Therefore, the Omniscient persons, who know these modes in

their totality, preach them in different ages of time, but their

preachings will never differ on account of the difference of time. 

Therefore, it is again said that the Agams, are beginningless and

endless they are eternal.

Corroborative statements about the uniformity of the preachings of all

the Tirthankars are found in the scriptures also.  The Acharang Sutra

declares(3) that the teachings of all the Tirthankars belonging to the

three divisions of time; past, present, and future are basically

uniform.  They all teach, “Do not kill any living beings, or overpower

them, or enslave them, or harass them, or drive them away.”  This is

the religion, which is eternal, firm, everlasting, and demonstrated in

precept and practice by virtuous persons.

But if from the empirical standpoint we ponder over what form in which

the Truth was manifested, who manifested it, and when and how the

manifestation took place, then the Jain Agams are proven to be a

creation and consequently composed by human beings.  Thus they do have

their author, they are not authorless.  Hence the scriptures declare;

“Having climbed the tree of perfect knowledge, an omniscient Lord

Tirthankar showers flowers of knowledge to enlighten principal

disciples, called Ganadhars.  They collected all these flowers in the

cloth of the intellect, and have interwoven them into the garland of

Dvadsangi” (4).

Thus the two views, one of authorship and the other of the

authorlessness of the Agams get well synthesized and the principle of

relativity finds its fulfillment here.

On determining the validity of the Agams from the Listener’s and

Speaker’s Point of View:

The test of goodness of anything depends on the measure of its

spiritual merit.  For this reason, from the absolute standpoint, Jain

scriptures could be ‘invalid’ (Mithya Shrut) if a person were to make

their use in fostering vices, while, on the other hand, the any other

religious scriptures (Vedas, Bible, Kuran, etc) are considered ‘valid’

(Samyak Shrut) if a person desirous of liberation were to utilize them

in illuminating the path leading to it.

From the empirical standpoint, the Jain scriptures are nothing but a

collection of the essentials of the teachings of Lord Mahavir (6).

In substance, this means that the absolute standpoint mainly keeps the

listener in view while determining the validity of the scriptures, and

the empirical standpoint mainly keeps the speaker in view while

determining the same.

A sentence or a word written in scriptures has no knowledge or

consciousness.  However, it possesses the power to convey the meaning

with which it is conventionally related.  It may mean or express

different meanings to different people.  In such a situation, from the

absolute standpoint, the validity of a sentence or a word is not

intrinsic but extrinsic.  That is, it depends on the merit of the

speaker as well as of the listener.  Therefore, it becomes inevitable

for one to consider the validity of the scriptures from the speaker’s

standpoint and from the listener’s standpoint.  The Jain consideration

of the validity of the Agam from both these standpoints is presented

below.

The composition of scripture has a specific purpose of showing the

listener the path of true happiness and liberation.  This is accepted

by all Indian thinkers.  Usefulness or harmfulness of scripture does

not depend on words but does depend on the merit of the person who

listens to words.  This is why the philosophical thinkers formulate

divergent doctrines including mutually opposed meanings in the same

scriptural statement.

There are many mutually opposed philosophical doctrines are derived by

different thinkers using the same scripture such as done in case of

Bhagavad Gita and Brahma-sutra of Vedic religions.

Hence, from the listener’s standpoint, to call a particular book

absolutely valid or invalid or to call a particular book Agam would be

quite misleading.  Considering this point, the Jain thinkers adopted a

very broad and cohesive view according to which whatever doctrine

fulfills the ultimate purpose of life is a valid Agam; the ultimate

purpose is to assist each living being in its efforts to attain

liberation.  According to this point of view, all scriptures including

the scriptures of other religions are accepted by Jains.

The person whose faith is rational will certainly utilize any book

that comes before him in illuminating the path of liberation; hence,

for him all scriptures are valid.  But for the person whose faith is

perverse, that is, who does not desire liberation, not only are the

scriptures of other religions invalid but so are the Jain Agams.  In

this attitude adopted for the determination of validity of scriptures,

there is persistent devotion to truth without a sectarian attachment

to scriptures of one’s own faith.

Now let us consider the validity of scriptures (Agam), made from the

speaker’s standpoint, that is, the empirical standpoint.  From this

standpoint, all the works included in the group of Jain Agams are

valid Agams.  In other words, all those works that are regarded by the

Jains as their own scriptures are included in the group of valid

Agams; and the works which the Jains regard as their Agam do not

include works other religions such as the Vedas etc.

Generally, if a scripture contains the statements of a self- realized

person, it is called Agam Praman (7).  But who is a self realized

person according to the Jains?  It is said that one who has conquered

attachment and aversion is a self realized person, a Jina, or an

Omniscient Lord.  Hence the Jain Agams contain the teachings of Jinas.

The speakers of Jain Agams were a self realized persons, free from

attachment and aversion, and possessed the direct perception of all

entities with their modes.  So there is no possibility whatsoever of

any faults or defects in the content of the Agams, nor is there mutual

contradiction or anything that stands contradicted by reason.  Thus,

primarily the direct teachings of Jina are regarded as the Jain Agam

Praman.  However secondarily the other works, based on the direct

teaching books (Ang Agams) books also regarded as Jain Agam Praman.

There arises a question as to whether the Angs (the first twelve books

of Agam) are the direct words of the Tirthankars.  Have the

Tirthankars themselves composed these Agam works?

Before answering this question it is necessary to clarify that the

extant Agam works are the compilation of the Agams composed by the

Ganadhars.  Here, having pointed out the general belief of the Jains

about the composition of the Agams, we shall further devote ourselves

to the special consideration of the extant works.

The Jain traditional view answers the above question as follows. 

Having pointed out the fundamental principles of reality and conduct,

Tirthankars have accomplished their objectives.  As has been already

shown, the Ganadhars or the Acharyas give these principles the form of

a composition.  It clearly follows that the author of the teachings

embodied in the composition is Tirthankar, while the Ganadhars

authored the word form of Sutra composition.(9)

When it is said that the Tirthankar authored the Agams(10), what is

meant is that he is the author of the meaning, not of the Sutras. 

From this exposition it is clear that the Jain Agams handed down to us

in the Ganadhars’ Sutra form are valid because the Tirthankars, the

authors of their meanings, are free from attachment and are direct

seers of all entities with all their modes.

According to the Jain tradition, like the Agams preached by the

Tirthankars, even those preached by a Pratyeka-buddha (11) are valid

(Praman) (12).

The twelve Anga works composed by the Ganadhars are not the only works

included in the entity called Jain Agam.  Other works which were not

composed by Ganadhars are also revered as a part of the sacred

literature, as it is a traditional view that the Ganadhars only

composed the twelve Angs.  The other canonical literature (Anga-bahya)

were composed by Stathviras or elder monks.

Such Sthavirs are of two types; Shrut-kevalis (one who comprehends the

entire Shrut-14 Purvas) and Das-purvis (one who has acquired knowledge

of the ten Purvas).  Shrut-kevalis, are those who are especially well

versed in the meaning and essence of the Agams.  Therefore, whatever

they will say or write could never contradict the Agams.  Their

objective is to compose works which expand upon or a bridge the

scriptures, according to the needs of the society of their times. 

Since the Jinas expounded the subject matter, the Jain Order has

naturally and without any hesitation included their works in the

entire ‘Jin-agam.’  Of course, the validity of their work is on

account of their being non-contradictory to the Agams composed by the

Ganadhars.

One of the reasons given to support the view that one who has acquired

knowledge of the entire Scripture can never be contradictory to the

words of a Kevalin (an omniscient, enlightened human being).  Also

that not all things are capable of becoming an object of words.  Only

some part of all the objects of the Tirthankar’s knowledge become the

object of his work.  And one who acquires knowledge of the written

scripture can thus ‘say’ what the Tirthankars had said (16).  From

this standpoint, there obtains no difference between a Kevalin (the

Omniscient) and a Shruta-kevalin (the Knower of the entire Shrut). 

Here, their validity is of equal strength.

Chronologically, 170 years (162 years according to another view) after

Lord Mahavir’s nirvan, the Jain Order became devoid of any

shrut-kevalis and there only remained those versed in the knowledge of

the ten Purvas.  Jains believe that only those persons who know and

comprehend the Purvas can be the spiritual practitioners having

rational faith (Samyak Darshan) (17).  Hence in their works there is

no possibility of there being present anything that may go against

Agam.  This is the reason why their works also gradually got included

in the Jain Agam.

Eventually, other precepts, though not supported by the Ang

scriptures, but simply constituting the approvals given by the wisest

Sthavirs in regard to some subject are also included in the Ang-bahya

Agams.  Even several muktaks (detached stanzas embodying relieving

wisdom) are also given place in the Ang-bahya Agam (18).

On the question as to whether adeshes and muktaks are included in the

Agam, the Digambar tradition is silent.  But both the Digambar and the

Swetambar traditions agree on the point that all the works composed by

Ganadhars, Pratyek-buddhas, Chaturdas-purvis and Das-purvis are

included in the Agams.

From this discussion it is clear that, from the transcendental

standpoint, truth manifestation takes place in the conscious soul, not

in the unconscious word.  Hence, the pages of a book are important

only in so far as they can serve as a means to spiritual development. 

With this standpoint all the literature in the world can be

acceptable, or Upadeya, to the Jains because, for a judicious soul,

seeking and finding the required spiritually beneficial material is

relatively easy.  But for an injudicious soul this same path of

regarding all the world’s literature as acceptable is fraught with

dangers.  Therefore, Jain sages have shown only the selected works

from the entire world literature to be Upadeya and placed them in the

Jain Agam.

The fundamental principle for selection is that the preachings of only

that subject which the speaker has directly seen, as it is, can be

acceptable; likewise, that subject should have been described as it is

in the preaching if the same is to acquire the characteristic of

acceptability.  No narration is regarded as valid if its roots are not

in such a preaching or if it is contradictory to such a preaching.

The words of one who, though not directly seeing things as they are,

but who hears, directly or indirectly, the truth, are to be regarded

as valid (Praman).  Such a hearer, being either a Shruta-kevalin or

Das-purvis, has no right to say things unheard from the above

mentioned right seer.

In short, the words or narration could be regarded as valid/authentic

only if someone had the true experience (true perception) of what is

narrated in words, as Agam is that Praman which is rooted in true

experience.  According to this principle, the adesh which we have

already mentioned cannot be included in the Agam.

The Digambars maintain that within a period of time after the Nirvan

of Tirthankar Mahavir, the entire Agam preached by him became extinct. 

This is the reason why they did not find it necessary to include the

adeshas in the Agam.  But when the Swetambars tried to preserve the

Agams, having compiled them, they found many things which have come

down from ancient Acharyas through oral tradition which were not

fundamentally based on the preachings of the Tirthankar; with a view

to preserving such things they placed them in the Jain Agam; and

calling them adesh or muktak, they suggested their difference from

the Agams of the other type.

 

Foot Note

1) See introductory description of 12 Anga works, occurring in

SamavayAnga; and

Nandi Sutra 57.

 

2) Brihatkalpabhasya, 202-203.

3) AcharAnga, Adhyay-4, Sutra-126,

SutrakritAnga 2.1.15, 2.2.41.

 

4) Avashyaka-niryukti

tavaniyamanarukkham arudho kevali amiyana

to muyai nanavutthi bhaviyajanavibohanatthea

tam buddhimaena padena ganahara ginhium niravana

titthayarabhasiyam gamthamti tao pavayanattha

 

5) Anya-yoga-vyava-cchedika - 5.

6) Nandi Sutra 40-41; Brhat gatha 88.

7) aptopadesah sabdah/Nyaya Sutra 1.1.7; also Tattvarthabhasya

1.20

8) Nandi Sutra 40.

9) attam bhasai araha suttam ganthanti ganahara niumam

sthiyatthai tao suttam pavatte Ava.  Ni.

10) Nandi Sutra 40.

11) A Pratyekabuddha is one who attains Keval©jnan

(enlightenment, omniscience) without listening to the

teachings of others but only through

pondering over any event occurring in the world.

12) suttam ganaharakathidam taheva patteyabuddhakatha*******

13) ***************

14) In the Jain Agam curriculum, the fourteen Purvas which form

a part of the twelfth Anga were placed last on account of

their deep meaning. So, the meaning of Chaturdas©purvi

(possessor of knowledge of the entire Shrut (sampurnashrutadhar). 

According to the Jain tradition it is clear that Bhadrabahu was the

last who possessed knowledge of these f ourteen Purvas.

Sthulabhadra learned from him the same, but following the order of

Bhadrabahu he could teach others the first ten Purvas only.  Hence

after Sthulabhadra there flourished Jain monks who possessed

knowledge of those ten Purvas only.  Titthogaliya, 742;

Avashyakachurni, Part II, P.187.

15) Brihatkalpabhasya, gatha 964.

16) Ibid 963, 966.

17) Brihatkalpabhasya 132.

18) Brhat. 144 with a foot note thereon; Visheshavashyakabhasya,

gatha 550.

 

Chapter II                Top

Obstructions to their Preservation

It is a wonderful feat of the Indians to have composed and preserved

the Vedas.  Even today one can come across hundreds of Brahmans who

can recite from memory, without any error, the entire Vedas from the

beginning to the end.  Though they do not have the tradition of the

meaning of the Vedas, they do have the tradition of Veda-recitation.

Jains too had made strong efforts in the past to preserve their Agams. 

However, the form in which the Ganadhars had compiled the teaching of

Tirthankar Mahavir is not available to us today.  Its language being

Prakrit, it is quite natural for its language to undergo changes.  So,

Jain monks could not preserve the Anga Agams word for word as the

Brahmans could do with regard to their Vedas.  In addition, they

completely forgot several works and made the state of several other

works perverse or corrupt.  Yet, we can certainly say that a large

portion of the extent Anga Agams is very near to the actual teachings

of the Lord Mahavir.  Although there have taken place changes in those

teachings and though even additions have been made, we cannot say that

the preaching as we have it is totally new, i.e., mentally imagined. 

It is so because the Jain Order has often made sincere efforts to

protect and preserve the entire Shrut.  History as a witness to it, we

cannot ignore these efforts.

Could the obstructions that caused the destruction of the Jain Shrut

in the past, not destroy the Vedas?  What is the reason why the Vedas,

which are even more ancient than the Jain canon, remain well

preserved, while much of the Jain Agams got destroyed or lost?  The

answer to this is easy.

In the preservation of the Vedas, lineages of two types have extended

their cooperation.  In the birth-lineage, the father teaches his sons,

and the later their sons, the Vedas; and in the learning-lineage, the

teacher teaches his pupils, and they their pupils; and thus they

continued, without any interruption, the tradition of Veda-recitation.

But in the preservation of Jain Agams the birth-lineage has no place

whatsoever.  Father teaches the Agams not to his son but to his pupil

alone.  Hence attempts were made to keep the tradition of the Jain

Shrut alive through the learning lineage alone.  This very deficiency

is the cause of the disorder of the Jain canon.  There was no

difficulty for the Brahmans to secure a well learned son and similarly

a well learned pupil; but for the Jain Shraman, his well learned son

was not necessarily entitled to read and to learn the scriptures, if

he himself were not a Shraman, while a less educated Shraman, though

not his son, is entitled to read and to learn from him the Shrut.

Again, preservation of the Vedas was done by one special class whose

self interest was in their preservation only.  Preservation of the

Jain Shrut is not dependent on any one special class.  Any one is

entitled to read and to learn the scriptures provided he becomes a

Shraman.  Moreover, a Brahman who has a birth right to learn the Vedas

cannot escape from the obligation entailing this right.  That is, in

the first stage of his life, it was obligatory for him to study the

Vedas; otherwise he had no place in Brahmanic society.  Contrary to

this, though a Jain Shraman possesses the right to study the Jain

Shrut, he cannot enjoy his right on account of certain reasons.  For a

Brahman, the study of the Vedas was everything, while for a Shraman it

was the good conduct that was everything.  Hence, even if some

dull-witted pupil could not study the entire Shrut, there would be no

obstruction of any sort in his attainment of emancipation (Moksha),

and his present life also passed easily without any obstruction

whatsoever on the strength of this good conduct.

In daily practices there is no special use of the Jain Sutras.  Since

there is possibility of the path of liberation being illumined through

the study of Samayik Pad (daily meditation an thought purification)

alone, is there any wonder if very few persons attempted to acquire

the knowledge of the entire Shrut?  Most of the Vedic hymns are

employed in rituals of various types, while only very few Jain Sutras

are meant to be used in the daily practices of the Shraman.  There is

a possibility of being immersed in the ocean of the Jain scripture,

only if a Shraman has special interest in knowledge for the sake of

knowledge; otherwise, without knowing much of the Jain Agam he can

enjoy the nectar of Shraman life.  The Jain Shramans could have penned

down their Agams, given them book form, and thus preserved them; this

would have relieved them of burdening their memory.  But they thought

that the act of penning down involved the violation of the vow of

non-attachment and non-possessions.  Such a violation was unbearable

to them.  In the act of penning down Agams and giving them book form

(the form of written documents) they found lack of self-discipline and

self control (19).

When they made liberal the vow of non-attachment and

non-possessiveness, they had already forgotten much of the Agams.  The

possession of books (pustak-parigraha), which they had formerly

considered to be the cause of the lack of self-discipline and

self-control, was now thought to be the cause of both (20).  They

totally changed their attitude towards the possession of books because

otherwise there was a fear of the destruction of the Shrut.  But what

could they do now?  What they had lost could not be recovered and

regained.

Of course, this benefit did accrue that whatever wealth of the Agam

which was still extant at that time remained protected and preserved. 

No more damage to it took place.  For the sake of the preservation of

the Shrut, the rules of Shraman conduct were made liberal.  Exceptions

to the rules of conduct were formulated, keeping in view the objective

of the preservation of the Shrut.  Now more importance was attached to

the study of the Agams in the daily practices.  Though they did all

this, they could not remove the original deficiency:  they did not

formulate an exception to the general rule that the teacher can teach

the Agams to his Shraman pupils and none other.  Hence, is there any

wonder if the knowledge of the Shrut disappears with the death of the

teacher in the absence of his Shraman pupils?  Due to several reasons,

especially the severe penances and very hard ascetic life of a Jain

Shraman, their numerical strength has remained meager compared to that

of the Shramans belonging to the other ascetic orders, such as the

Buddhists.  In such a situation, is there any wonder if the Agams

written down in Valabhi leave aside the Agams orally extant could not

be preserved?

Foot Note

19) pottaesu gheppamtaesu asamjamo bhavai/Dasavai Churni p.21

20) Kalam puna paduccha charanakaranattha avocchitti nimittam cha

genhamanassa potthae samhamo bhavai; Ibid p. 21.

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter III                Top

Recensions

(A)     The First Recension done in Pataliputra

 

In Buddhist history, it is well known that to establish order in the

preaching of Lord Buddha, the Buddhist monks convened three Councils

(Samgatis) in chronological order.  Similarly, with a view to

establish order in the preaching of Lord Mahavir, Jain Acharyas

assembled three times and prepared three recensions of the preachings. 

Whenever the Acharyas saw that the Shrut was waning and that there was

disorderliness into it, they assembled and established order in it.

The Order of the Jain monks assembled in Patliputra about 160 years

after Lord Mahavir’s death, and also after a terrible famine which

lasted for many years (21).  At that time, the middle region of the

country (Madhyadesh) was under the sway of this severe famine, causing

the dispersion of Jain monks in various directions.  Naturally, the

Anga Agams fell into a bad state.

The monks assembled after the famine, and asked one another what they

could recollect and thus collected and arranged eleven of twelve Angs. 

But they found that nobody recollected the entire Drishti-vada, the

twelfth Ang.  At that time Acharya Bhadrabahu alone possessed the

knowledge of Drishti-vada, but he had taken recourse to the yogic path

of a special sort and was in Nepal.  So the Jain community requested

Acharya Sthulibhadra with many other monks to go to Bhadrabahu to

learn the text of the Drishti-vada from him.  The Drishti-vada, being

the twelfth Anga Agam book, contained fourteen Purva-Sutras.  Of those

monks, Sthulibhadra alone was successful in acquiring the knowledge of

it.  After acquiring the knowledge of ten Purvas, he misused the

miraculous power earned through their use.  When Bhadrabahu came to

know this, he stopped giving lessons to Sthulibhadra.  After

beseeching by Sthulibhadra, he agreed to teach him the remaining four

Purvas, but he forbid Sthulibhadra to teach these four Purvas to

others (22).

As a consequence of this, there existed in the Order of Jain monks,

the knowledge of 14 Purvas up to Sthulibhadra.  After his death, the

Order possessed the knowledge of eleven Angs and only ten Purvas. 

Sthulibhadra’s death (23) occurred 215 years (207 years according to

the Digambar view) after Lord Mahavir’s Nirvan.

As a matter of fact, even Sthulibhadra was not a Shruta-kevalin

because though he had learnt both the text and meaning of the ten

Purvas, he had learned simply the text of the remaining four Purvas. 

The knowledge of the meaning of these four Purvas was not imparted to

him by Acharya Bhadrabahu.

Hence, according to the Swetambar view we have to say that after

Acharya Bhadrabahu’s death (170 years after Lord Mahavir’s death)

Shrut-kevalis disappeared from the arena of the Jain Order.  After

him, there flourished no knower of the entire Shrut.  The Digambar

maintain that the disappearance of Shrut-kevalis occurred 162 years

after Lord Mahavir’s death.  Thus, there is a difference of only eight

years in the two views.  The two traditions of the lineage up to

Acharya Bhadrabahu are as follows:

 

Digambar Tradition (24)

Years

Keval-Jnani Acharyas

Gautam-swami           12

Sudharma-swami         12

Jambu-swami            38

 

Shruta-kevalin Acharyas

Vishnu                14

Nandimitra            16

Aparajit              22

Govardhan             19

Bhadrabahu            29

162

Swetambar Tradition (25)

Years

Keval-Jnani Acharyas

Sudharma (26)         20

Jambu-swami           44

 

Shruta-kevalin Acharyas

Prabhava              11

Sayyambhava           23

Yasobhadra            50

Sambhutivijay          8

Bhadrabahu            14

170

In short, of the twelve Angs composed by the Ganadhars, eleven Angs

bereft of the four Purvas were recovered by the Order assembled at the

first council.  Because though Sthulibhadra knew the text of the

entire Shrut, he had no right to teach the four Purvas to others. 

Hence after him flourished knowers not of the entire canon but of the

eleven Angas and ten Purvas only, so there was a question of

preserving the Shrut contained in only these.

Division of the Agams on the Basis of View Points of Exposition, and

the Extinction of the Purvas:--

According to the Swetambars, the series of the Das-purvis (knowers of

eleven Angas and ten Purvas only) completely ended with the death of

Acharya Vajra.  His death occurred in 114 Vikram Samvat (584 years

after Lord Mahavir’s death).  But according to the Digambar, Dharmasen

was the last Das-purvis, and 345 years after Lord Mahavir’s death,

Das-purvis altogether disappeared from the arena of the Order.  This

means that the Digambars place the disappearance of Shrut-kevalis

eight years earlier than the date when the Swetambars place it, and

the former place the disappearance of Das-purvis 239 years earlier

than the date when the latter place it.  The essential point that

follows from this is that the process of the extinction of the Shrut

is somewhat speedy according to the Digambar view.

The two traditions of the lineage of the Das-purvis are as follows:

 

Digambar Tradition (27)

162

Visakh Acharya  10

Prosthil        19

Kshatriya       17

Jayasen         21

Nagasen         18

Siddhartha      17

Dhritisen       18

Vijay           13

Buddhilinga     20

Deva            14

Dharmasen       16

345

 

Swetambar  Tradition (28)

170

Sthulibhadra    45

Mahagiri        30

Suhastin        46

Gunasundar      44

Kalak           41

Skandil (Samdilya)38

Revati-mitra    36

Arya-Mamgu      20

Arya-Dharma     24

Bhadragupta     39

Shrigupta       15

Arya-Vraja      36

584

After Arya-Vajra there flourished Arya-Rakshit, who remained

Yug-pradhan for thirteen years.  Keeping in view that pupils could

have less developed faculties of intelligences, grasping, and

retention, he made four classification of the Agams, based on the four

points of view exposition (anuyog).  Until his times each and every

Agam Sutra work was expounded from all the four viewpoints of

exposition.

Charan-karan-anuyog:  (29)

Those Agams which expounded the ethical viewpoint are classified under

the heading of Charan-Karan-anuyog.

E.g., eleven Angas, also known as Kalik-shrut, Mahakalpa-shrut and

Ched-sutras.

Dharma-katha-anuyog:

Those Agams which expounded the religious story viewpoint are

classified under the heading of Dharma-Katha-anuyog.

E.g., Rishibhasitas.

Ganit-anuyog:

Those Agams which expounded the mathematical viewpoint are classified

under the heading of Ganit-anuyog.

E.g., the Surya-prajnapti.

Dravya-anuyog:

Those Agams which expounded the metaphysical viewpoint are classified

under the heading of Dravya-anuyog.

E.g., the Drishti-vada.

 

It was necessary for the Acharyas to expound each and every Sutra

work, employing extensively the viewpoints (Naya), so long as the

divisions of the Sutra works were not made on the basis of the

viewpoints of exposition.  But it became unnecessary to employ those

viewpoints in the exposition of each and every Sutra work as soon as

the divisions of the Sutra works were made on the basis of the

viewpoints of exposition (30).

From what is said above, it is clear that the teaching and the study

of the Shrut must not have continued in the same manner as they had

continued before Arya-Rakshit and there must have crept into them

slackness to a considerable degree.  So it was quite natural that the

canon should gradually fall into loss and corruption.  It has been

said in connection with even Arya-Rakshit that he studied nine Purvas

and only 24 yavikas of the tenth Purva (31).  Even Arya-Rakshit was

not able to impart to his pupils that much knowledge of the Shrut

which he himself had acquired.  In the life story of Arya-Rakshit it

has been said that of all his pupils only Durbalik Puspamitra could

study nine Purvas in their entirety but he afterwards forgot the ninth

Purva in the absence of constant recitation on his part.  Gradually

there disappeared the experts on the tenth to first Purva, in that

order, and thus there arrived a time when there were none who knew the

Purvas.  This was the situation in the year 1000 after Lord Mahavir’s

death(32).  But according to the Digambar view that situation occurred

683 years after Mahavir’s Nirvan.

B)      The Mathuri Vachan (Recension done in Mathura)

 

It is mentioned in the Curni (33) on the Nandi Sutra that owing to the

famine which lasted twelve years, the Sutra works became extinct in

the absence of the activities of taking lessons, repeating them, and

pondering over them.  In other words, during those unsettled times,

the monks neglected their regular studies of the Sutras; so the Sutra

works fell into oblivion.  After this twelve year long famine, the

monks assembled in Mathura under the presidentship of Arya Skandil and

collected and arranged the Kalik Shrut on the basis of what they could

recall and recite.  Since this vachan was done in Mathura, it is

called Mathuri Vachan.  Some assert that the Sutras had not become

extinct but there had taken place disappearance of the principal

Anuyogadhars.  At that time there existed only one Anuyogadhar,

Acharya Skandil.  As he imparted knowledge of the anuyogs to other

monks in Mathura, the vachan came to be known as Mathuri.  From this

it is clear that owing to the second famine the Shrut fell into a bad

state.  This time the credit of the compilation and arrangement of the

Shrut goes to Acharya Skandil.  Muni Shri Kalyana-vijayji maintains

that the period of Acharya Skandil’s Yugapradhanatva fell between 827

and 840 Vira Samvat.  Therefore, this vachan should have taken place

in this period (34).  As a result of this vachan, the Agams were

written down.

C)      The Valabhi Vachan (Recension in Valabhi)

 

Synchronous with the council at Mathura, Acharya Nagarjun convened a

council of monks at Valabhi and tried to collect and arrange the

Agams.  Whatever Prakirna works, in addition to a particular Agam work

and its anuyogs, were retained in memory by Vachak Nagarjun and the

assembled monks.  Then they were written down and the recension was

prepared after having corrected lengthy portions according to the

context (35).  As Nagarjun was the president of the is council, the

Vachan is called the Nagarjun Vachan as well.

 

 

The Penning down by Devardhigani

 

Then a council of monks presided over by Kshama-Shraman Devardhi-gani

was held at Valabhi, 150 years after the councils presided over by

Skandil and Nagarjun at Mathura and Valabhi respectively.  It was

decided to document all available Prakirna Sutras, and preserve the

Ang and other Sutras that were documented in the two former councils. 

This will bring uniformity in Sutras as far as possible by resolving

the differences in Sutras.  Of course, the most important differences

were documented in Curnis and Tikas.

This is the reason why we come across in the Sutras as also in the

commentary the phrases such as, ‘vayanamtare puna’ (according to

another recension), and ‘Nagarjuni-yastu-pathanti’ (the followers of

Nagarjun read the text as) (36).  Several Prakirna works which were

available in one recension only were considered authentic in the form

in which they were available (37).

This task was accomplished 980 years after Mahavir’s Nirvan.  After

that event, the text of most of the Agam works available at present

was settled at this time.

If the list of the Agam literature that occurs in the Nandi Sutra were

regarded as the list of all the Agams documented in this council at

Valabhi, then we have to say that even after this documentation

several Agam works, especially many Prakirans, have become extinct. 

Also Virastav and Pinda-niryukti Sutras are not mentioned in the Nandi

Sutra but which are still recognized by the Swetambars as Agam works.

 

Foot Note

 

21) Avashyak Churni, Part II, p. 187.

·         22) Titthogaliya 801-2. Also see ViranirvanaÄ

Samvat  Jaina Kalaganana, p.94.

23) According to Acharya Kalyanavijayji, this refers not to

Acharya Bhadrabahu’s death but to the end of his

Yug©pradhanatva.

·         See Viranirvana Samvat aur Jaina Kalaganana, foot note, p.62.

24) Dhavala, Vol. I, Introduction, p.26.

25) Indian Antiquary, Vol. XI, September, pp 245-246. See also

·         Vira-nirvana samvat Aur Jain Kalaganana, p. 62.

26) Sudharma remained in the state of a Kevalin for eight years;

before that he was in the state of a chadmastha.

27) Dhavala, Vol. I, Introduction, p. 26.

·         28) Merutunga-Vicharashreni. Viranirvana. p. 64.

29) Avashyak Niryukti 763-777; Visheshavashyakabhasya 2284-2295.

30) Avashyak Niryukti 762; Vishesh 2279.

31) Vishesh. Tika 2511.

32) Bhagavati 2.8; Sattarisayathan 327.

33) Nandichurni p.8

·         34) Viranirvana. p. 104.

35) Ibid, p. 110.

36) Ibid, p. 116

37) Ibid, p.112.

 

Chapter IV                Top

Works Composed on the basis of Purvas

Both the Swetambars and the Digambars unanimously agree on the point

that the Purva works have become extinct, as also on the point that

the contents of the Purva works have not become completely extinct. 

There are several works which refer to the Purvas.  As we shall see,

the Satkhand-agam and the Kashaya-prabhrit have been composed by the

Digambar Acharyas on the basis of the Purva works.

Now we present the Swetambar view on this point.  According to the

Swetambar view, the Drishti-vada embodies of the entire sacred lore,

but for the benefit of the common people other works have been

composed in easily comprehensible style, incorporating in them the

Drishti-vad’s subject matter (38).  Accepting this view, it is being

said that the Ganadhars first composed the Purva works and afterwards,

on the basis of these Purva works, they themselves composed the

remaining Angas (39).  This view seems to be correct.

But we should understand this much, that prior to the composition of

Ang literature, whatever sacred lore was available in the form of the

Shrut became well known by the name of the Purva; and on the basis of

the Purva, keeping in view the teaching of Lord Mahavir, twelve Angas

were composed and the Purvas are included in one part of the twelfth

Anga.  When the works came to be composed in the easily comprehensible

style on the basis of Purvas only, it was quite natural that the

interest in the study and teaching of the Purvas declined; and this

constitutes the reason for the extinction of the Purvas, first in the

chronological order.

This is simply a statement of the general principle.  But with regard

to some works, long and short, it has been clearly said that their

composition is based on a particular Purva.  Here we give a list of

such works, so that one can know that not only the Satkhand- agam and

the Kashaya-pahud, recognized as Agams by the Digambars, but so many

literature recognized as Agams by the Swetambars are also having their

source in the Purvas only.

1.             The composition of Nisith-adhyayan in Maha-kalpa Shrut, of the

Acharang, is based on the 20th Pahud of the third Achara-vastu of the

Pratya-khyan Purva (40).

2.             The composition of the Dasa-vaikalik Sutra is based on Purvas as

follows:

 

Dharma-prajnapti chapter -   Atmapravad Purva

 

Pindai-sana chapter      -   Karmapravad Purva

 

Vakya-suddhi chapter     -   Satyapravad Purva

 

All other chapters       -   Pratyakhyan Purva

 

The author of the Dasa-vaikalik Sutra is Sayyambhava.

3.             Acharya Bhadrabahu has composed the Dasa-sruta-skandha,

Brahat-kalpa Jit-kalpa, and Vyavahar Sutra basing them on the

Pratyakhyan Purva.

4.             Parisah-adhyayan (chapter) of the Uttara-dhyan Sutra is taken from

the Karma-pravad Purva.

 

Also most of the karma theory composed in the non-agam literature were

also adopted from the Purvas, but as they are irrelevant to the

context, we do not take them in the review of our present discussion.

 

Foot Note

 

38) Vishesh. gathas 551-552; Brhat. 145-146.

39) Nandi Churni, p. 56; Avashyakaniryukti 292-293. Contrary to

this view, there is another view which maintains that first

of all the AcarAnga was composed and afterwards in due order

the remaining Angas were composed. AcarAnga Niryukti 8, 9;

AcarAnga Churni p.3; Dhavala, Vol I, p. 65.

40) AcarAnga Niryukti 291.

 

Chapter V                Top

A List of the Jain Agam Works

Now we shall see which works are at present, in practice, regarded as

Agams.

There is no difference of opinion among the sects of the Jains, on the

point that the basic source of the entire Jain literature is a group

of twelve Anga works composed by the Ganadhars.  Also, the sects

mostly agree with regard to the titles of the twelve Anga works.

The twelve Anga works are as follows:

1.     Acharang

2.     Sutra-kratang

3.     Sthanang

4.     Samavay-ang

5.     Vhakhya-prajnapti

6.     Jnata-dharma-kathang

7.     Upasaka-dashang

8.     Antahkra-dashang

9.        Anuttaroupa-patika-dashang

10.   Prasna-vyakrana

11.   Vipak Sutra

12.   Drishti-vada

 

According to all the three sects, the last Anga work named

Drishti-vada has been the first to become extinct.

Extinction of the Agams (Shrut) according to the Digambar view:

The Digambars maintain that after the death of Lord Mahavir the canon

started becoming extinct gradually, and that in the year 68 after the

death of Lord Mahavir there was not a single Acharya who possessed

total knowledge of the Angas or Purvas; of course, there were Acharyas

who possessed the knowledge of some portion of ‘this or that’

Anga/Purva.

In the tradition of such Acharyas, there flourished Pushpadant,

Bhutabali, and Gunadhara; the first two composed the Satkhand Agam on

the basis of a portion of the second Purva named Agrayaniya, and the

third, Gunadhara, composed Kashaya-pahud on the basis of a portion of

the fifth Purva named Jnanapravad (41).  Both these works have been

accorded a respectable place in the Agams in the Digambar tradition. 

According to them the Angas have already been extinct.

The following are the time periods in chronological order, according

to the Digambars in which the Shrut gradually became extinct after the

death of Lord Mahavir (42).

 3 Kevalins - Gautam, etc. (43)                62 years

 5 ShrutaKevalins - Vishnu, etc. (43)         100 years

11 Dasapurvis - VishakhAcharya, etc. (44)     183 years

5 EkadasAngadharis - Nakshatra

Jasapal

Pandu                    220 years

Dhruvasen

KamsAcharya

4 AcarAngadharis -   Subhadra

Yasodhar

Yasobahu                118 years

LohAcharya

683 years

 

Ang-bahya Agams of the Digambars

Though the Digambars contend that the fourteen Ang-bahya Agams,

naturally different from the twelve Anga Agams, were composed by

Sthavirs, they also believe that those Ang-bahya Agams too have become

extinct.  The titles of these fourteen Ang-bahya Agams are as follows:

1.     Samayik

2.     Chaturvin-shatistava

3.     Vandana

4.     Pratikraman

5.     Vainayiks

6.     Kritikarma

7.     Dasavaikalik

8.        Uttaradhyayan

9.        Kalpavyavahar

10    Kalpakalpik

11.   Mahakalpik

12.   Pundarik

13.        Mahapundarik

14.   Nisithik (45).

 

Upon examining the list of Ang-bahya Agams, accepted by the

Swetambars, it becomes quite clear that out of 14 Ang-bahya Agams,

many have been preserved.

Though the Digambars believe in the extinction of the original Agams,

they have given as much importance to some works as they gave to the

original Agams; having given these works the title ‘Jaina Veda,’ they

grouped them in the four anuyogs as follows:

1.          Pratham-anuyoga

     Padma-puran                   (Ravisen),

     Harivamsa-puran               (Jinasen),

     Adi-puran                     (Jinasen),

     Uttar-puran                   (Gunabhadra)

 

2.          Karan-anuyoga

Surya-prajnapti

Chandra-prajnapti             (Jayadhaval).

 

3.          Dravy-anuyog

Pravachanasar,                (Kunda-kunda)

Samayasar,

Niyamasar,

Panchastikayasar

Tattvarthadhigam Sutra (Umasvami) and

commentaries on it composed by Samantabhadra (46),

Pujyapad, Akalarik, Vidyanand, etc.

Aptamimamsa (Samantabhadra) and

commentaries on it composed by Akalarik,

Vidyanand, etc.

 

4.          Charan-anuyog

Mulachar (Vattakera)

Trivarnachar,

Ratna-karanda-shravak-achar (47).

 

On examining this list, it becomes clear that the works written up to

the tenth century have been included in it.

Agam works of the Sthanak-vasi Sect:

According to the Swetambar Sthanak-vasi sect, all the Angas except the

Drishti-vada are extant.  The Ang-bahya Agams maintain that only the

following twenty one works are extant.

 

* 12 Upangs,

*  4 Ched Sutras,

*  4 Mul Sutras,

*  1 Avashyak

 

12 Upangas -

1.                Aupapatik,

2.                Rajaprasniya,

3.                Jivabhigama,

4.                Prajnapan,

5.                Surya©prajnapti,

6.                Jambudvipaprajnapti,

7.                Chandra©prajnapti,

8.                Nirayavali,

9.                Kalpavatamsik,

10.   Puspik,

11.                Puspachulik,

12.                Vrisnidas.

 

In Shastroddhar Mimamsa, Acharya Amolakh-rsi writes that the

Chandra-prajnapti and Surya-prajnapti are both the upangas of

Jnatadharma.  Bearing in mind this exception, one should join

Aupapatik, etc.  with AcharAnga, etc.  respectively.

4 Ched Sutras -

1.                Vyavahar,

2.                Brihatkalpa,

3.     Nisitha

4.                Dasashrutaskandha

 

4 Mul Sutras -

1.                Dasavaikalik,

2.                Uttradhyayan,

3.     Nandi,

4.     Anuyog.

 

1 Avashyak

Thus, in all 21 Angabahya Agam works are available at present.

The Shvetambar Murtipujak sect accepts these 21 Angabahya Agam works

in the very form in which they are accepted by the Sthanakavasi sect. 

In addition to these works, the Shvetambar Murtipujak sect has

accepted some other works as Angabahya Agam, but the Sthanakavasi sect

regards them as either not authentic or extinct.

Like the Sthanakavasi sect, its subsect known as the Terahapanthi

accepts the existence (at present) and authenticity of 11 Anga works

and 21 Angabahya works only, not of the other works.  In both these

sects, commentarial works (viz.  Niryukti, etc.)  are not accepted as

authentic.

Currently, the outlook of some Sthanakavasi monks has become liberal

on account of their inclination towards the history of Agam literature

and also on account of their engagement in the study of old

commentaries like Niryukti.  They have started maintaining that the

authors of the Dasavaikalik, etc.  were not Ganadhars but Sthavirs

like Sayyambhava, etc.  But there are other Sthanakavasi monks

projecting a more sectarian outlook who have no faith whatsoever in

the commentaries on the Agams and rejects the study of Sanskrit

commentaries, and firmly believe that the authors of both the Anga

Agam and the Angabahya Agam were Ganadhars only, and not any other