Agam Sahitya Me Prakirnako Ka Sthan Mahavattva Rachnakal Evam Rachayita

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text "Agam Sahitya me Prakirnako ka Sthan, Mahavattva, Rachnakal evam Rachayita" by Sagarmal Jain, focusing on the position, significance, period of composition, and authors of Prakirnaka literature within Jain Agam literature:

Overall Summary:

This text explores the place, significance, period of composition, and authors of Prakirnaka literature within Jain Agam literature. The author argues that Prakirnakas, which are essentially diverse texts outside the core twelve Anga-Agams, constitute a vast and important part of Jain scripture. The perceived limited number of ten Prakirnakas is a later development and not uniformly accepted, with the broader definition encompassing all Angabahya (outside the Angas) texts being more historically accurate. The text emphasizes the ancient origins of many Prakirnakas and their valuable content, which sheds light on various aspects of Jain knowledge, particularly spiritual practice.

Key Points and Detailed Breakdown:

1. Position of Prakirnakas in Agam Literature:

• Foundation of Jain Scripture: Like other religions, Jainism relies on its holy scriptures, the Agams, as authoritative texts.
• Classification: Initially, Agams were classified as Anga-Agams (twelve texts traditionally believed to be composed by Ganadharas based on Tirthankaras' teachings) and Angabahya (texts outside the Angas).
• Definition of Angabahya: Angabahya texts are those written by Sthaviras (senior monks) based on Jinavachana (the teachings of Jina).
• Nandisutra's Classification: The Nandisutra further divides Angabahya into Avashyaka (essential practices like Samayika, etc., now known as Avashyakasutra) and Avashyaka-vyatirikt (non-essential). The latter is divided into Kalika and Utkalika.
• Prakirnakas within Kalika and Utkalika: The nine texts now classified as Prakirnakas are found within these Kalika and Utkalika divisions.
• Early Absence of the Term "Prakirnaka": Ancient Agams like Nandisutra and Paksikasutra do not explicitly mention a "Prakirnaka" category. The classification of Agams into Anga, Upanga, Cheda, Mula, Chulika, and Prakirnaka first appears in Acharya Jinaprabha's Vidhimargaprappa (13th century CE).
• Broader Historical Definition: The author suggests that initially, all texts other than the Anga-Agams were considered Prakirnakas. This is supported by the Dhavala commentary on the Shatkhandagama, which labels texts outside the twelve Angas as Prakirnakas, including texts like Uttaradhyayana and Dashavaikalika.
• Lack of Uniformity in Current Definition: The current tradition of recognizing ten Prakirnakas is considered late and there is disagreement among Shvetambara scholars regarding which specific texts should be included. Different scholars present varying lists.
• Digambara Perspective: The Digambara tradition, following the Tattvarthabhashya, considers all texts other than the Anga-Agams as Prakirnakas.
• Vastness of Prakirnaka Literature: The author concludes that Prakirnaka literature represents a very large portion of Jain Agam literature, and limiting their number to ten is a later, debatable view.

2. Significance of Prakirnaka Literature:

• Spiritual Importance: Despite some traditions not considering them Agams, the content of many Prakirnakas is considered spiritually more significant than some Anga-Agams.
• Diverse Knowledge: Prakirnakas illuminate various aspects of Jain knowledge:
  • Astronomy and Geography: Devendrastava and Dwipsagaraprajnapti.
  • Chronology and Geography: Titthogali.
  • Jain Astrology: Jyotishkarandaka and Ganividya.
  • Jain History: Titthogali is unique in the Shvetambara tradition for discussing the gradual extinction of Agam knowledge.
  • Pilgrimage and Sacred Sites: Saravali focuses on the history and importance of Shatrunjaya.
  • Jain Biology: Tandulavaicharika offers a concise introduction.
  • Physiognomy and Astrology: Angavidya describes human body parts, their auspicious/inauspicious signs, and predictions.
  • Sangha Organization: Gachchhara.
  • Guru-Disciple Relations: Chandravydhyaka.
  • Exegesis: Virastava provides etymological explanations of Mahavira's epithets.
  • Jain Sadhana: Chatuhsharana explains the importance of the fourfold Sangha and Jain practice.
  • Samadhi-marana (End-of-life Practice): Aturapratyakhyana, Mahapratyakhyana, Maranavibhukti, Samstara, Aradhanapataka, Aradhanaprakarana, Bhaktapratyakhyana, and others detail preparatory measures and methods for Samadhi-marana.
• Value and Importance: This diverse content underscores the value and importance of Prakirnaka literature in the field of Jain literature.

3. Period of Composition of Prakirnakas:

• Ancient Origins: Many Prakirnakas are older than some Anga-Agams, evidenced by their mention in Nandisutra and Samavayasutra.
• Rishibhashita: Considered older than most Agams in language, style, and content. It reflects a time when Jainism was not yet confined to sectarian boundaries and embraced ascetics from other traditions. The author links its composition to a period before the hardening of sectarian divisions around the 3rd century BCE, as seen in texts like Sutrakritanga and Bhagavati Sutra. Rishibhashita's respectful mention of Arhats and its critique of figures like Mankhali Gosala (whom it calls Arhat Rishi) further point to its antiquity.
• Freedom from Sectarianism: Texts like Aturapratyakhyana, Mahapratyakhyana, Tandulavaicharika, Maranavibhukti are noted for being free from sectarian biases.
• Nandisutra's Evidence: The nine Prakirnakas mentioned in Nandisutra must predate it (estimated 5th century CE).
• Samavayasutra's Evidence: The explicit mention of Prakirnakas in Samavayasutra (estimated 3rd century CE) indicates the existence of many Prakirnakas by that time.
• Devendrastava: Dated around the 1st century BCE, as indicated by its author Rishipalita's mention in the Kalpasutra Sthaviravali, and supported by archaeological evidence.
• Vīrabhadra's Works: Texts like Chatuhsharana, Aturapratyakhyana, Bhaktaparinna, and Aradhanapataka are attributed to Acharya Virabhadra, whose composition period is estimated to be around 1008 or 1078 CE (based on an inscription in Aradhanapataka).
• Broad Time Span: Prakirnaka literature spans a long period, from the 5th-4th century BCE (Rishibhashita) to the 10th century CE (Aradhanapataka).
• Majority Before 5th Century CE: The author notes that the majority of significant Prakirnakas were composed before the 5th century CE, with the exception of a few later works.
• Influence on Anga-Agams: Many verses from Prakirnakas are found in Shvetambara Anga-Agams and other early texts, suggesting their origination in Prakirnakas and their incorporation into the Angas before the Valabhi recension.
• Digambara Tradition Evidence: Hundreds of verses from Prakirnakas are found in Digambara texts like Mulachara, Bhagavati-Aradhana, and works of Kundakunda. This indicates that these Prakirnakas predated Mulachara and Bhagavati-Aradhana (which are generally considered post-6th century CE).
• Jyotishkarandaka: Attributed to Padaliptacharya, who lived around the 1st century CE, as indicated by his mention in Niyukti literature and his contemporaneity with Aryarakshita. It is based on the ancient Suryaprajnapti.
• Chronological Range: The composition period of Prakirnakas ranges from the 4th-3rd century BCE to the 10th century CE, a period of approximately 1500 years.

4. Authors of Prakirnakas:

• Lack of Authorial Attribution: For most Prakirnaka texts, the author's name is not mentioned. Texts like Rishibhashita, Chandravydhyaka, Aturapratyakhyana, Mahapratyakhyana, Maranasamadhi, Ganividya, Samstara do not indicate their authors.
• Attributed Authors: Only two ancient Prakirnakas clearly mention their authors in the final verses:
  • Devendrastava: Authored by Rishipalita, who lived around the 1st century BCE.
  • Jyotishkarandaka: Authored by Padaliptacharya, also around the 1st century CE.
• Acharya Virabhadra: Attributed as the author of Kusalabandhi Adhyayan and Bhaktaparinna. His period is estimated to be the latter half of the 10th and the beginning of the 11th century CE.
• Conclusion on Authorship: While many authors remain unidentified, the known authors like Rishipalita and Padaliptacharya date back to antiquity, contributing to the ancient nature of these texts.

Concluding Remarks:

The author expresses regret that some Jain traditions (Digambara, Sthanakavasi, Terapanthi) do not recognize Prakirnakas as Agams. However, an unbiased study reveals that their content is not contradictory to these traditions' beliefs. The text highlights the ongoing work of the Agam Sansthan, Udaipur, in translating these Prakirnakas into Hindi, hoping to foster their study and appreciation in all traditions. The author considers the neglect of Prakirnaka literature as an oversight of a significant aspect of Prakrit literature and praises the Agam Sansthan for its inclusive approach in publishing these works.