Agamo Ki Vachnaye

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Agamo ki Vachnaye" by Dr. Sagarmal Jain:

The book "Agamo ki Vachnaye" (Recitations of Agamas) by Dr. Sagarmal Jain, a renowned scholar of Jain philosophy, discusses the historical "Vachanas" (recitations or councils) of the Jain Agamas. These Vachanas were crucial for preserving and editing the sacred scriptures. The article, compiled from Dr. Jain's work "Arddhamagadhi Agama-Sahitya: Ek Vimarsh" (Arddhamagadhi Agama Literature: A Discussion), outlines five significant Vachanas held at Pataliputra, Kumara Parvat, Mathura, Vallabhi, and a second time at Vallabhi.

While the finalization of the Shvetambara-accepted Arddhamagadhi Agamas occurred in the Vallabhi Vachana (around 980 or 993 V.N. - Vikram Samvat), Vachanas took place prior to this. Historically, five such Vachanas are mentioned.

1. First Vachana (Pataliputra): This Vachana occurred approximately 160 years after Mahavira's Nirvana. Traditional accounts attribute the fragmentation of Agama knowledge to a severe twelve-year famine in Madhyadesha, which caused some ascetics to perish and others to migrate. Upon their return, the knowledge was partially forgotten and disorganized. Leading acharyas gathered in Pataliputra to systematize the Agama knowledge. However, due to the absence of a specific scholar of Drishtivada and Purva literature, only the eleven Angas (parts of the scripture) were systematized. Drishtivada and its embedded literature could not be fully preserved because its expert, Bhadrabahu, was in Nepal. Bhadrabahu agreed to impart knowledge of the Purvas to his disciples like Sthulibhadra, but Sthulibhadra could only fully grasp ten Purvas with their meaning, acquiring only verbal knowledge of the remaining four. Consequently, the Pataliputra Vachana attempted to reorganize the twelve Angas, but only succeeded with the eleven. Drishtivada and its associated Purva literature began to decline, leading to the creation of supplementary texts based on its content.

2. Second Vachana (Kumara Parvat, Odisha): Held in the 2nd century BCE, about 300 years after Mahavira's Nirvana, during the reign of Emperor Kharavela in Kumara Parvat, Odisha. Not much specific information is available about this Vachana, other than an effort to preserve the Shruta (scriptural knowledge). In this era, the transmission of Agamas was primarily oral through the guru-shishya lineage, leading to natural variations due to time, place, and the defect of forgetting. Vachanas aimed to standardize the linguistic form and textual variations. New texts composed by Sthaviras (elder monks) were also considered and granted validity. Differences in conduct rules and their scriptural interpretations were also resolved during these Vachanas. The specific disputes settled during the Khandagiri Vachana are not authentically known.

3. Third Vachana (Mathura): This Vachana took place in the 3rd century CE (827 V.N.) in Mathura, under the leadership of Arya Skandila. It is also known as the Mathuri Vachana or Skandili Vachana. The Nandichurna mentions two beliefs regarding this Vachana. One states that after a period of famine and subsequent prosperity, the Kalikasutras were reorganized based on the memory of the remaining monks, with Arya Skandila presiding. Another view suggests that the sutras were not destroyed, but the Anuyogadars (scholars who expound scripture) had passed away, and only the surviving Skandila reintroduced the Anuyogas.

4. Fourth Vachana (Vallabhi, Saurashtra): This Vachana was contemporary to the third Vachana. While the monastic community of North, East, and Central regions gathered in Mathura, the monastic community of the South-West assembled in Vallabhi (Saurashtra) under the leadership of Arya Nagarjuna. This is also known as the Nagarjuniya Vachana. Arya Skandila's Mathuri Vachana and Arya Nagarjuna's Vallabhi Vachana were contemporaneous. The Nandi Sthaviravali mentions Arya Himavanta in connection with Arya Skandila, suggesting they were contemporaries. The Nandi Sthaviravali also indicates that Arya Skandila's Anuyoga is still prevalent in the southern part of Bharatavarsha, implying that the Agamas compiled by him were followed in South India. Historical evidence suggests that the Yapaniya sect, which developed from the schism in the Northern Nirgrantha Sangha, accepted the Agamas compiled by Arya Skandila, and their influence was in Central and South India. Acharya Palyakirti Shakatayana clearly mentions the Mathura Agama in his "Stri-Nirvana Prakaran." This indicates that the Agamas accepted by the Yapaniya sect were those of the Mathuri Vachana. Hundreds of verses from scriptures like Acharaanga, Uttaradhyayana, Dashavaikalika, Kalpa, Vyavahara, Sangrahani Sutras, and Niyuktis, accepted by the Shvetambaras today, are still found in Yapaniya texts like Mulachara and Bhagavati Aradhana. This suggests the Yapaniyas possessed the Agamas of the Mathuri Vachana. Interestingly, the Agama verses in Yapaniya texts are in Sauraseni Prakrit, not Arddhamagadhi or Maharashtri Prakrit. Furthermore, citations in Aparajita's commentary on Bhagavati Aradhana from Acharaanga, Uttaradhyayana, and Kalpasutra are also in Sauraseni, not Arddhamagadhi. This implies that the Mathuri Vachana, under Skandila's leadership, was influenced by Sauraseni. Additionally, textual variations are observed between the Agamas of the Mathuri Vachana and the current Agamas of the Vallabhi Vachana. Some verses and prose passages supporting "achelkatva" (non-possession of clothes) are also found. Kundakunda's works contain verses from Anuyogadvara Sutra, Prakirnakas, and Niyuktis, possibly taken from the Mathuri Vachana Agamas of the Yapaniyas. The concurrent Vachanas by Skandila in Mathura and Nagarjuna in Vallabhi might suggest disagreements between them, potentially over issues like clothing and utensils. The statement by P. Kailashchandra that Devagani was a prominent figure in the Vallabhi Vachana contemporaneous with the Mathuri Vachana is considered an error. In reality, Arya Skandila led the Mathuri Vachana, and Arya Nagarjuna led the first Vallabhi Vachana, and they were contemporaries, as evidenced by the Nandi Sutra. Disagreements between Arya Skandila and Nagarjuna are evident. The question of Devarddhi's role in Vallabhi if it was Nagarjuna's Vachana is raised, along with the speculation that Vadivetala Shantishuri represented the Nagarjuniya side. It is argued that Digambara scholars have created many misconceptions by not thoroughly studying Shvetambara literature. There is no mention in the original verses that Shantishuri was contemporary to the Vallabhi Vachana. Examining Agama commentaries reveals that Nagarjuniya and Devarddhi's Vachanas ran concurrently for many years, as their textual variations are more frequently mentioned in commentaries than in the original texts.

5. Fifth Vachana (Second Vallabhi Vachana): This Vachana occurred in the latter half of the 5th century CE, approximately 150 years after the Mathuri and Nagarjuniya Vachanas, under the leadership of Devarddhigani Kshamashramana in Vallabhi. The primary objective of this Vachana was to put the Agamas into written form. It appears that both the Mathuri and Nagarjuniya Vachanas were integrated, and where disagreements existed, the Nagarjuniya reading was included with the notation "Nagarjuniyastu pathanti" (Nagarjuniyas read thus).

Critique: Dr. Jain questions the consistent explanation of famine as the sole reason for the disorganization of the Sangha before each Vachana. He posits that the first Vachana at Pataliputra was likely driven by the political unrest and chaos in the Magadha empire due to the atrocities of the Nandas and the invasion of Chandragupta Maurya, rather than a famine. This instability would have caused the Sangha to migrate to coastal regions or mountainous areas like Nepal, which might explain Bhadrabahu's journey to Nepal.

The Pataliputra Vachana focused on systematizing the twelve Angas, successfully organizing eleven, but failing to compile Drishtivada, which contained literature from other traditions and the pre-Mahavira Parshvanatha lineage. The mention of Sthulibhadra studying the fourteen Purvas with Bhadrabahu in Nepal, but only grasping ten fully, reinforces that only eleven Angas were compiled and edited at Pataliputra due to the absence of a fourteen-Purva expert. Supplementary literature like Prajnapana, Chhedasutras (Nandi, Anuyogadvara), and Chulikasutras, being later compositions, were likely not included. While texts like Avashyaka, Dashavaikalika, and Uttaradhyayana predated the Pataliputra Vachana, their status in this Vachana is unclear, though it's speculated they remained in use due to their essential nature for all monks and nuns.

The second Vachana at Kumara Parvat (Khandagiri) in Odisha during Kharavela's reign aimed to organize the Shruta, possibly involving the compilation and editing of texts composed before the 1st century BCE.

The Mathuri Vachana is believed to have attempted the compilation and editing of all texts composed up to the 4th century CE. It specifically focused on organizing the Kalikasutras, which include texts like Uttaradhyayana, Rishi Bhashita, Dashashruta, Kalpa, Vyavahara, and Nishitha, as well as many currently classified as Upangas. While the Anga Sutras from the Pataliputra Vachana might not have been accepted in Mathura, some Upangas and Chedasutras like Kalpa were likely reorganized. The Sauraseni influence seen in the citations from Mathuri Vachana Agamas in Yapaniya commentaries suggests that this Vachana encompassed the compilation of all texts of that period. The Mathuri Vachana was also accepted by the Yapaniya tradition, which supported "achelata." Yapaniya texts and commentaries cite and acknowledge the authority of these Agamas. Arya Shakatayana's mention of the Mathura Agama and his exposition of its tenets and citations further support this.

Dr. Jain believes the Mathuri Vachana, led by Arya Skandila, was acceptable to both the Sachcel (clothed) and Achel (unclothed) factions of the Nirgrantha Sangha in North India, and it contained evidence supporting both. The necessity of Nagarjuna's Vachana in Vallabhi at the same time might stem from disagreements between Skandila and Nagarjuna on various issues, prompting Nagarjuna to conduct an independent Vachana.

The Vallabhi Vachana not only recorded the Agamas but also compiled and edited them. This compilation was not arbitrary. It is incorrect for the Digambara tradition to claim that the Shvetambaras rewritten the Agamas according to their beliefs in Vallabhi, nor were the Agamas compiled in Vallabhi entirely identical to those compiled in earlier Vachanas like Pataliputra. It is a fact that many Agama texts, along with their subject matter, have been lost over time, a fact verifiable through analysis of current Agamas. Devarddhi's Vallabhi Vachana not only put the Agamas into written form but also edited them, reclassifying the available content and incorporating parts of Agamas received through tradition or hearsay that were not included in previous Vachanas. For instance, the entire second Shruta Skandha, with its ten Varga and Adhyayana in Jnatadharmakatha, was included in this Vachana, as the Shvetambara, Yapaniya, and Digambara traditions only mention nineteen Adhyayanas in their Pratishthakarma Sutras and elsewhere. There is no mention of the ten Varga of the second Shruta Skandha in ancient texts.

Similarly, in Antakraddasha, Anuttaraupapata-dasha, and Vipakadasha, the arrangement of Varga, as reported in Sthananga Sutra to have ten Adhyayanas each, was also a contribution of Devarddhi. He reorganized these texts by adding material obtained through tradition in place of lost Adhyayanas.

It is difficult to determine who compiled and edited the current subject matter concerning the Asrava-Samvara Dvara in Prashnavyakarana. However, if we assume that the author of Nandi Sutra is Devavachaka, who preceded Devarddhi, then it is conceivable that Devarddhi completed the ancient subject matter of Prashnavyakarana concerning Asrava and Samvara Dvara. Thus, partial or complete changes in six Anga Agamas, from Jnatadharma to Vipakasutra, can be attributed to Devarddhi. It is believed that these changes were made based on previous traditions or hearsay. Additionally, Devarddhi performed another significant task: where a particular subject matter was elaborated in multiple Agamas, he presented the detailed description in one place and referred to it elsewhere. In some ancient texts like Bhagavati, he reduced the repetition of subject matter in Agamas by referencing later Agamas like Prajnapana, Nandi, and Anuyogadvara. Similarly, when a description appeared repeatedly within the same Agama, he abbreviated it by mentioning the first word of the description. He also included important information from later periods, such as the mention of seven Nihnavas and seven Ganas in Sthananga Sutra. Therefore, the Vallabhi Vachana not only recorded the Agamas but also systematized and edited their subject matter. While interpolations and omissions may have occurred, they were based on hearsay or tradition, otherwise, the Agamas would not have gained acceptance.

Furthermore, the Vachanas influenced the linguistic form of the Agamas based on their locations. For instance, Agamas organized in Patna and Kumara Parvat (Khandagiri) in Odisha retained their Arddhamagadhi language, but when they were re-edited in Mathura and Vallabhi, linguistic changes occurred.

The Agamas standardized in the Mathuri Vachana were significantly influenced by Sauraseni. Although the Agamas of the Mathuri Vachana are not available today, the cited excerpts in the works and commentaries of the northern Achcel sect (Yapaniya Sangha) show linguistic variations in word forms and structure, despite conceptual similarities. The excerpts from Acharaanga, Uttaradhyayana, Nishitha, Kalpa, and Vyavahara cited in the commentary on Bhagavati Aradhana differ slightly in their linguistic form and textual variations from the Vallabhi Agamas. Nevertheless, the original source of both Devarddhi's Agamas and the Mathuri Vachana Agamas was the same. It is possible that over time, slight differences emerged in language and subject matter. Therefore, it would be incorrect to assume that Devarddhi's Vallabhi Vachana Agamas were entirely different from the Mathuri Vachana Agamas.