Bhadrabahu Sambandhi Kathanako Ka Adhyayan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Bhadrabahu Sambandhi Kathanako ka Adhyayan" by Sagarmal Jain:

This study critically examines the narratives surrounding Acharya Bhadrabahu, a highly revered figure in all Jain traditions. Despite his recognized status as the last Acharya to possess the "Chaturdash Purva" (Fourteen Pre-existing texts) and the twelfth Anga (part of the canon), there's significant divergence in accounts from pre-Christian eras up to the 15th century CE, making it difficult for ordinary readers to arrive at a conclusive understanding. The author argues that the biographies of Bhadrabahu are a mix of oral traditions and imaginative embellishments, making it challenging to discern historical truth.

Key Issues and Divergences:

• Identity Confusion: A major problem identified is the conflation of events and achievements of multiple Jain Acharyas named Arya Bhadra or Bhadrabahu with the ultimate Chaturdasha Purvadhar Acharya Bhadrabahu. This name similarity has led later authors to attribute unrelated incidents and works to the primary Bhadrabahu, sometimes to support sectarian beliefs.
• Lack of Consensus: Even within the Shvetambara and Digambara traditions, there is no complete agreement on Bhadrabahu's life and works. Scholars like Acharya Hastimal Ji have pointed out that the biographical details are often mixed up, possibly involving two or three different individuals named Bhadrabahu.
• Western and Indian Scholarship: The study acknowledges Professor Hermann Jacobi as the first Western Indologist to critically examine Bhadrabahu's life and works. Jacobi argued against attributing the Niryuktis (commentaries) to the Chaturdasha Purvadhar Bhadrabahu, as the Niryuktis were composed between Vira Nirvana Samvat (VNS) 584-609, while Bhadrabahu (the Purvadhar) is believed to have passed away in VNS 162 (Digambara) or 170 (Shvetambara). The study also highlights the contributions of Indian scholars like Muni Punyavijayji, Muni Kalyanavijayji, Pt. Sukhlalji, Pt. Dalsukhbhai, Acharya Hastimal Ji, Acharya Mahapragya Ji, and Sadhvi Sanghamitra Ji, who have offered critical analyses, often based on comparative studies of primary sources from both traditions. Dr. Rajaram Ji is mentioned for his critical analysis of Raiddhu's Bhadrabahu Charitra, though his focus remained primarily on Digambara sources.

Bhadrabahu's Biography:

• Early Life and Lineage: Ancient scriptural evidence for Bhadrabahu's life before his initiation is scarce. The Kalpasutra and Nandi Sutra mention him as a disciple of Yashobhadra and mentor to Godasa, Agnidatta, Jintatta, and Somdatta. The Godasagana, starting from his disciple Godasa, had four branches: Tamraliptika, Kotivarshiya, Paundravardhanika, and Dasikharbatika. His Gotra is identified as 'Paina' in Kalpasutra, Nandi Sutra, and Dashashrutaskandhaniruyukti. The author interprets 'Paina' not as "ancient" (as commonly believed) but as "Eastern" or a resident of the East, suggesting Bhadrabahu was from Bengal or Bihar, supported by the names of the branches originating from his disciples.
• Place of Birth: There is no mention of his birthplace in early Shvetambara texts like Kalpasutra, Nandi Sutra, and Dashashrutaskandhaniruyukti. Later Shvetambara texts place him in Pratishthanpur (Paithan, Maharashtra). Prabandhachintamani mentions his supposed brother Varahamihira as a resident of Pataliputra. Digambara texts like Bhavasangraha associate him with Ujjain. Harisena's Brihatkatha Kosa (932 CE) states he was born to Somasharma and Somashri in Kotipur (Devakotta) in the Pundravardhana kingdom. However, the author corrects this to Kotivarsha, near Pundravardhana in Bengal, aligning with the Godasagana branches.
• Area of Travel: Shvetambara tradition suggests his travels ranged from the Nepal Terai region in the north to Tamralipti in South Bengal. The claim of his 12-year meditation in the Nepal Terai is found in texts like Tithogali Painna and Avashyaka Churni, considered credible by the author.
• Journey to the South and the Famine: Shvetambara sources are silent on his southern journey, while Digambara sources present contradictions. Bhavasangraha mentions Bhadrabahu predicting a 12-year famine in Ujjain, leading to the migration of disciples. Harisena's Brihatkatha Kosa mentions Bhadrabahu predicting the famine, Chandragupta receiving initiation from him and studying ten Purvas, and Vishkhacharya going south, while Bhadrabahu himself is said to have undertaken a fast in Bhadrapad region near Ujjain. However, many sources, including Brihatkatha Kosa, Kahakosu, and Bhavasangraha, do not mention Bhadrabahu himself going south, only his disciple Vishkhacharya. The author believes these southern journey narratives, originating between the 10th and 16th centuries, are likely based on oral traditions or imagination. The author's perspective is that Bhadrabahu, due to his old age, likely remained in Magadha or the Nepal Terai, sending his disciples south. This is supported by the earlier dating of his meditation in the Terai.
• Attribution of Niryuktis: The author strongly agrees with scholars like Jacobi, Muni Punyavijayji, and Acharya Hastimal Ji that the Niryuktis were not authored by the Eastern Gotriya Bhadrabahu. However, there is disagreement on who the actual author was.
• Inscriptions and Sectarian Divisions: Inscriptions from Chandragiri hill and Parshvanatha Vasati in Shravanabelagola mention Bhadrabahu and Chandragupta. The inscription from Parshvanatha Vasati (circa 600 CE) explicitly mentions two Bhadrabahus: the Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu and the Nimittaka (astrologer) Bhadrabahu. The latter is likely related to Varahamihira. The author states that clear sectarian divisions (Shvetambara, Digambara, Yapaniya, etc.) are evidenced only from the 4th and 5th centuries CE, suggesting that the sectarian disputes mentioned in Digambara texts are either fabricated or misattributed to the Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu.
• Chandragupta: The Chandragupta who received initiation from Bhadrabahu is often identified with Chandragupta Maurya. However, Raiddhu's Bhadrabahu Charitra identifies him as the grandson of Ashoka's grandson, which is historically inconsistent with the known lifespan of the Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu. The author concludes that these narratives likely involve poetic imagination.
• Dispute over Clothing and Utensils: Digambara texts often link the origin of Shvetambara and Yapaniya traditions to disputes over clothing, utensils, and blankets. The author argues that the described events, particularly the timing of the dispute (VNS 606/609), are chronologically inconsistent with both Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu and the Nimittaka Bhadrabahu. The author suggests the dispute over clothing and utensils actually occurred between Acharya Shivabhuti and Acharya Krishnan between VNS 606 and 609, and the name Bhadrabahu was later associated with this event due to the presence of his disciple Bhadra Gupta.
• Pannavanas and Niryuktis: The author points out that while the Nandi Sutra and Kalpasutra mention Acharya Bhadra Gupta, Shivabhuti's disciple, and Acharya Bhadra (Gautama Gotra), whose lineage led to the 'Bhadranvaya' and who is credited with the Niryuktis, the attribution of Niryuktis to the Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu remains controversial.

Bhadrabahu's Works:

• Authorship of Chedasutras: Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu is considered the author of the Chedasutras like Dashashrutaskandha, Kalpa (Brihatkalpa), and Vyavahara. This is confirmed by Dashashrutaskandha Niryukti and other sources. The author also posits that he is the author of the entire Achara Chula, including Nishitha.
• Compilation of Uttaradhyayana Sutra: The author suggests that Bhadrabahu might have been the compiler of the Uttaradhyayana Sutra. While the sutra itself is a compilation, the possibility exists that the compiler was a Purvadhar Acharya, and Bhadrabahu, being a prominent one, could be the compiler. The name "Bhadrabahava" for Uttaradhyayana is cited, implying a connection. However, the author clarifies that "proktani" (explained) does not mean "composed," and the varying language and style within the Uttaradhyayana suggest it wasn't authored by a single person. Still, it's plausible that Bhadrabahu compiled it after composing the Chedasutras.
• Controversy over Niryuktis Author: The author reiterates that the authorship of Niryuktis by Acharya Bhadrabahu I is debatable.

Conclusion:

The study concludes by emphasizing the significant discrepancies and fictional elements present in the narratives surrounding Acharya Bhadrabahu, particularly in later Digambara traditions. These narratives often seem to have been constructed to belittle other sects. The author argues for a critical re-evaluation of these accounts to understand the historical facts. It is highlighted that Acharya Hastimal Ji identifies five Acharyas named Bhadrabahu, and four of them correspond with figures known in Shvetambara traditions under different names. The author ultimately suggests that the Shruta Kevali Bhadrabahu is primarily known for the Chedasutras and possibly the compilation of the Uttaradhyayana Sutra, while the authorship of Niryuktis remains a point of contention.