Kahavali Kartta Bhadreshwarsuri Na Samay Vishe

This document is an academic article by M.A. Dhaky discussing the historical period of Bhadreshwarsuri, the author of the Kahavali. The Kahavali is a collection of narratives and biographies in Prakrit, considered valuable for its historical, cultural, and literary content, particularly its descriptions of prominent figures in the Nirgranth (Jain) – Shvetambara tradition.

Key points and arguments presented in the article:

• The Enigma of Bhadreshwarsuri's Time: There is significant scholarly disagreement regarding the exact period of Bhadreshwarsuri and the composition of the Kahavali.

• Scholarly Opinions:

  • Umashankar Shah considered the Kahavali to be ancient, similar to the linguistic features found in Agamic Churnis, and likely composed shortly after Yakini-sunu Haribhadra Suri (circa 700-785 CE).
  • Pandit Lalchandra Gandhi dated it to the latter half of the 12th century Vikram Samvat (early 12th century CE).
  • Pandit Amritlal Bhojak suggested a post-9th century composition (likely between 990-1094 CE), based on references to Shilanka Suri's Chatupannama-ha-purisachariya (VS 925 / 869 CE) and the Vibudhananda Nataka.
  • Pandit Ambalal Premchand Shah pointed out that Vardhamanasuri's Ganaratnamahodadhi (VS 1197 / 1141 CE) quotes from a Dipavyakarana by a Bhadreshwarsuri, who might be the same person as the Kahavali author. However, this alone doesn't fix his date.
  • Pandit Dalsukh Malvania suggested the author could be Bhadreshwarsuri, a disciple of Vadindra Deva Suri of the Brihadgaccha, placing the Kahavali in the latter half of the 12th century.

• Methodology and Challenges:

  • The author acknowledges that the Kahavali is an incomplete but useful large text being edited by Harivallabh Bhayani and Ramanik Shah, who will delve deeper into these issues.
  • Dhaky aims to present preliminary observations based on available evidence.
  • A major challenge is the existence of multiple Bhadreshwarsuris in the medieval period, making it difficult to identify the author of the Kahavali.

• Eliminating Bhadreshwarsuris based on evidence:

  • The article lists eight Bhadreshwarsuris who lived around the 11th-12th centuries CE.
  • Crucial evidence: The Akhyan-kamanika-kosha-vritti by Amradatta Suri (VS 1189 / 1133 CE) contains a brief account of Siddhasena Divakara that closely matches the Kahavali's narrative style and details. The story of Mallavadi in Amradatta's work is a refined version of the one in the Kahavali. This evidence leads Dhaky to rule out the Brihadgaccha Bhadreshwarsuri (number 1 in the list) and the Chandragaccha Bhadreshwarsuri (number 2), as they lived after Amradatta Suri.
  • The Pauranik Bhadreshwarsuri (number 3) was a contemporary of Amradatta, so he is also excluded.
  • The Rajgacch Bhadreshwarsuri (number 4), associated with the restoration of Ujjayant Tirth (VS 1185 / 1129 CE), is also unlikely, as the Kahavali seems older than the 12th century.
  • Bhadreshwarsuris from the late 11th century (numbers 5 and 6) are also considered less likely candidates, as the Kahavali appears even older.
  • The Bhadreshwarsuri from the Chandragaccha (number 7), seventh in lineage from Ratnakara Suri (circa 1050-1100 CE), and the Bhadreshwarsuri mentioned in an inscription from Ujjain (number 8, circa 1000-1025 CE) are considered. However, the latter's context is ambiguous, making its utility for identifying the author limited.

• Linguistic and Stylistic Analysis:

  • Dhaky agrees with Shah and Sandesara that the Prakrit of the Kahavali shows ancient characteristics, possibly due to prolonged exposure to and imitation of older sources.
  • He suggests that some passages might have been directly borrowed from older texts, leading to the impression of an older language.
  • He notes a lack of refinement, poetic quality, and cohesive structure in Bhadreshwarsuri's expression compared to contemporary Shvetambara scholars like Devachandra-Hemachandra Suri, Nemichandra-Amradatta Suri, Vardhamana Suri, and Jinavallabha Suri. This reinforces the idea of the Kahavali being older.
  • He refutes Gandhi's claim of evidence for a 12th-century composition, calling it mere speculation.

• Key Internal Evidence for Dating:

  • Equating 'Kshamasramana', 'Divakara', and 'Vachaka': Bhadreshwarsuri seems to equate these terms. The author argues that 'Divakara' was primarily a title and not used synonymously with 'Vachaka' or 'Kshamasramana' before Haribhadra Suri, and that Bhadreshwarsuri's usage creates doubt about him being a very ancient Acharya.
  • Misconception in the Padaliptasuri Katha: The Kahavali mixes the stories of three different Padaliptasuris. The mention of Padaliptasuri going to Manyakheta (Mankhed) points to the third Padaliptasuri, whose time is established as around 925-970 CE. This suggests Bhadreshwarsuri lived at least 25-50 years after this, indicating a period around 975-1025 CE. If he were too close to the third Padaliptasuri, he might have avoided such chronological mix-ups.

• External Evidence from Genealogies and Inscriptions:

  • Vardhamanasuri's Guravali: The Rushabcharitra by Vardhamanasuri of Chandrakula begins its guru lineage with a Bhadreshwarsuri. If we assume a gap of about 5 generations between this Bhadreshwarsuri and Vardhamanasuri (who lived sometime after the late 11th century), it points to Bhadreshwarsuri living around 975-1000 CE. The language and style of this guravali also resemble those of the Kahavali.
  • Bhadreshwaragaccha: An inscription from Mathura (dated VS 1604 / 1048 CE) mentions "Shri Bhadreswaravartha Mihit..." indicating the existence of a Bhadreshwaracharya Gaccha by 1048 CE. This Gaccha likely originated from the Bhadreshwarsuri who is the ancestor of Vardhamanasuri.

• Conclusion on Dating:

  • The author concludes that the Bhadreshwarsuri from whom the Gaccha originated is likely the author of the Kahavali.
  • Combining the internal evidence (pre-975 CE), the inscription (existence of Gaccha by 1048 CE), and the genealogical evidence (circa 975-1000 CE for the ancestor Bhadreshwarsuri), Dhaky posits that the lifetime of this Bhadreshwarsuri as a monk was likely between 905-1025 CE.
  • This leads to an estimated composition period for the Kahavali around 1000 CE.

• Speculation on the Lost Second Chapter: Dhaky speculates that the lost second chapter of the Kahavali might have contained biographies of figures contemporary to Haribhadra Suri (but younger than him), such as Krishnarishi, Shilasuri (Shilacharya or Shilasuri), and Siddharshi. It might also have included the story of Mantunga Suri (author of Bhaktamara Stotra) and Jeevadeva Suri of the Vayagaccha.

• Reason for Scarcity of Manuscripts: The Kahavali is a large text with a simple, traditional style. After the composition of works like the Prabhavakacharitra, its value diminished, leading to fewer transcriptions and making its manuscripts rare today.

In essence, M.A. Dhaky's article meticulously examines various historical and linguistic clues to pinpoint the authorship of the Kahavali, ultimately suggesting that Bhadreshwarsuri, the author, likely lived and composed his work around the turn of the 11th century CE.