Dharmottar Ke Tippan Ke Karrta Mallavadi

This document, "Dharmottar ke Tippan ke Karrta Mallavadi" by Dalsukh Malvania, explores the identity and chronological placement of a Jain scholar named Mallavadi who wrote a commentary (tippan) on Dharmottara's commentary on Dharmakirti's Nyayabindu.

The author begins by clarifying the scholarly lineage: Dharmakirti wrote Nyayabindu, and Dharmottara wrote a commentary on it, which then became known as Dharmottara. Several commentaries (tippan) exist on this Dharmottara, one of which is attributed to Mallavadi. The author confirms this by referencing library catalogs from Patan and Jaisalmer.

He then discusses an instance where Professor Chiravasuki published an incomplete manuscript of a Nyayabindu commentary, attributing it to Mallavadi. However, Chiravasuki later realized his error and corrected it in his book "Buddhist Logic." Malvania's possession of a complete copy of the Mallavadi-authored commentary, obtained through the grace of Muni Shri Punyavijayji, allowed him to confirm that it is indeed distinct from the one Chiravasuki had initially published.

The central question addressed is the timing and location of this Mallavadi. The Jain tradition recognizes a Mallavadi as the author of Nayachakra. Dr. Satish Chandra Vidyabhushan identified this Nayachakra author as the commentator on Dharmottara. However, the traditional date for the Nayachakra author is Vira Samvat 884. This date creates a conflict with the known periods of Dharmakirti and Dharmottara. Vidyabhushan, to resolve this discrepancy, suggested that 884 might not be Vira Samvat but rather a Shak or Vikram Samvat year, placing Mallavadi's time around 827 CE or 762 CE.

Malvania argues that the Mallavadi who authored Nayachakra is not the same Mallavadi who commented on Dharmottara. He asserts that if Vidyabhushan had examined Nayachakra, he would have realized the need to differentiate between two scholars named Mallavadi. Malvania points out that Nayachakra mentions the famous philosopher Dignaga but not any philosopher who came after Dignaga, like Dharmakirti, nor even their philosophical views. It also does not reference the Vedic philosopher Kumarila. While it mentions Bhartrihari, it's not the Bhartrihari mentioned by I-Tsing, but an earlier one whose time predates Kumarila (around 550 CE). Therefore, the Mallavadi who wrote Nayachakra is chronologically distinct from the Mallavadi who commented on Nyayabindu.

The text then delves into evidence from an inscription edited by Dr. Altekar in Epigraphica Indica. This inscription, dated to Shak Samvat 743 (821 CE), mentions a king Karka Suvarna of Gujarat. It also refers to Aparajita Suri, who belonged to the Mulasangha Sen Amnaya. The inscription details the guru lineage of Aparajita, indicating that Subhuti was his guru, and Mallavadi was Subhuti's guru. If Aparajita was alive in 821 CE, then his guru Subhuti and Subhuti's guru Mallavadi would have lived earlier. Malvania suggests that this Mallavadi, the guru of Subhuti, could be the commentator on Dharmottara.

This interpretation aligns with Dharmottara's approximate time of 700 CE. The author then considers the Tattvasangraha, a work that refutes the views of a Digambara scholar named Sumati. If this Sumati is the same Sumati who was the disciple of the Mallavadi in question, then the timing needs to be consistent with the Tattvasangraha. Dr. Bhattacharya places the author of Tattvasangraha, Shantarakshita, between 705-762 CE. The inscription confirms Sumati's disciple Aparajita's existence in 821 CE. Bhattacharya estimates Sumati's time to be around 720 CE. However, this creates a 100-year gap between guru and disciple, which is problematic. If Sumati's time is adjusted to around 720 CE, this discrepancy is resolved.

Shantarakshita wrote Tattvasangraha before going to Tibet, likely before 746 CE, the year he established a new monastery there. Thus, Tattvasangraha might have been composed around 745 CE. If Sumati is considered a contemporary of Shantarakshita, his lifespan could extend up to 762 CE, making his disciple Aparajita's existence in 821 CE plausible. Considering these factors, the guru Mallavadi of Sumati can be placed between 700-750 CE.

Finally, Malvania observes that Mallavadi's commentary on Nyayabindu mentions the views of commentators who preceded Dharmottara but does not refer to any commentators who came after Dharmottara. The existence of several later commentators whose views are mentioned in other commentaries but not in Mallavadi's strengthens the argument that there isn't a significant time gap between Dharmottara and Mallavadi. Therefore, Mallavadi's period can be estimated to be between 700-750 CE, which is consistent with the timelines of both Dharmottara and Shantarakshita.