Kalikal Sarvagna Acharya Hemchandra A Re Appraisal

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Kalikal Sarvagna Acharya Hemchandra A Re Appraisal" by Vasant M. Bhatt:

This paper offers a re-appraisal of the scholarly contributions of Acharya Hemachandra, a prominent Jain scholar who lived approximately six centuries after the compilation of the Jain Agamas. The author, Vasant M. Bhatt, focuses specifically on Hemachandra's genius as a grammarian, examining his approach to language, his structuralist methods, and his overall impact on linguistic studies in India.

Hemachandra's Historical Context and Literary Output:

• Era: Hemachandra was active during the reign of King Siddharaja Jayasimha of the Caulukya dynasty in Gujarat (1096-1142 AD). This period was characterized by intellectual discourse and a rivalry between Gujarat and other learning centers like Malava.
• Broad Scholarly Reach: Hemachandra was a prolific writer, producing works on a wide array of subjects, including:
  • Grammar: Siddha-Hema-Sabdanusasan (Sanskrit-Prakrit grammar), Unadi-sutra, Dhatupatha, Linganushasana, and Ganapatha.
  • Lexicography: Abhidhanacintamani, Desinamamala, and Anekarthakosa.
  • Poetics and Metrics: Kavyanusasana and Chandonusasana.
  • Epistemology and Logic: Praman-mimamsa (partially available).
  • Philosophy and Practice: Yogasastra.
  • Biographical and Narrative Literature: Dvyasraya-mahakavya (Sanskrit and Prakrit versions, also known as Kumarapalacaritra), Trishashti-salakapurusa-charita, Mahavira-charita, and Parisishtha-parva.
  • Hymnal Literature: Five hymns, including Vitaraga-stotra.
• Title: His comprehensive contributions earned him the honorific title "Kalikala Sarvajna" (Omniscient of the Iron Age) from later Svetambara Jain writers.

Hemachandra's Grammar: The Siddha-Hema-Sabdanusasan

• Motivation: The paper suggests that Hemachandra was commissioned by King Siddharaja Jayasimha to create a grammar that would bring prestige to Gujarat, especially after the capture of the library of Dhara, which contained works by Bhoja of Malava. Hemachandra aimed to surpass existing grammars like Panini's Astadhyayi and Bhoja's Sarasvati-kanthabharana.
• Innovation: A key innovation of Hemachandra was his inclusion of Prakrit grammars (Māgadhī, Saurasenī, Paiśācī, Mahārāṣṭrī, Ārṣa/Ardhamāgadhi, Apabhramśa) alongside Sanskrit. This reflected the widespread use of Prakrit in literary circles and his understanding of the "need of the hour."
• "Pancangi Vyakarana": His grammar is described as a "Pancangi" or five-faced grammar, encompassing:
  1. Siddha-Hema-Sabdanusasan (Sanskrit and Prakrit grammar) with its commentaries.
  2. Unadi-sutra.
  3. Dhatupatha.
  4. Linganushasana.
  5. Ganapatha.
• Illustrative Works: He also composed lexicons and laksanakavya (illustrative poems) like the Dvyasraya Kavyas to demonstrate the application of his grammatical rules. This comprehensive approach distinguished him from earlier grammarians like Candragomi, Devanandi, Sakatayana, and Bhoja.

Critique of Hemachandra's Grammatical Approach:

• Originality: While acknowledging Hemachandra's significant output, the author critically evaluates his originality. Bhatt notes that Hemachandra's Kavyanusasana is seen by some scholars as a compilation rather than an original work, borrowing heavily from earlier authorities.
• Structuralism:
  • Pada-samskara-paksa vs. Vakya-samskara-paksa: The paper argues that Hemachandra's grammar primarily follows a pada-samskara-paksa (word-level analysis) rather than the more natural vakya-samskara-paksa (sentence-level analysis) exemplified by Panini. This means Hemachandra derives individual word forms without necessarily considering their integration within a sentence.
  • Nominal vs. Verbal Forms: A notable criticism is that Hemachandra did not maintain an identical methodological approach for deriving nominal and verbal forms. In nominal formation, he used case-terminations as basic morphemes and explained allomorphs. However, for verbal forms, he treated all 180 tense/mood terminations as basic morphemes, unlike Panini who used the sthānin-ādeśa (base-substitute) principle for both. This is seen as a simplification but also a structural failure, potentially due to an unconscious attempt at simplification without full structural consistency.
  • Placement of Meta-Rules: Hemachandra's placement of meta-rules (paribhasa-sutra) and rules for resolving conflicts between rules at the end of his grammar, rather than at the beginning, is considered an imperfection in his structural arrangement.
• Vedic Grammar Omission: Hemachandra's exclusion of Vedic grammar from his scheme is justified by the author as a practical decision, given that Vedic language was primarily used in rituals and its teaching had become obsolete. However, Hemachandra still paid attention to the derivation of Vedic-context taddhita words, making his grammar accessible to a wider audience, including Brahmins. This pragmatic approach is praised.
• Acceptance of "Un-Paninian" Usages: Hemachandra's willingness to accept and provide grammatical rules for usages that deviated from Panini's framework is seen as a commendable effort that fostered language development.

Hemachandra's Prakrit Grammar:

• Sanskrit as Root Language: The paper highlights Hemachandra's view that Sanskrit is the original language from which Prakrit is derived, a practical approach for descriptive grammar.
• Distinguishing Meaningful Variations: Hemachandra is credited as the first to recognize and document instances where different Prakrit forms, derived from the same Sanskrit word, carry distinct meanings. This demonstrated his keen observational skills and deep understanding of Prakrit literature.
• Case Usage: His clarification on the usage of the sixth case ending in Prakrit for possessive and dative contexts is also noted as a mark of his meticulousness.

Conclusion: Acharya Hemachandra is lauded for his substantial originality, particularly in integrating Prakrit grammar and his comprehensive approach to linguistic studies. His recognition of post-Paninian usages facilitated language evolution. While his structuralist approach has certain limitations, especially in the uniformity of his methodology for nominal and verbal forms and the placement of meta-rules, his overall achievements are significant enough to justify his title of "Kalikala Sarvajna." His work provided an all-encompassing study of Sanskrit and Prakrits, setting a high standard for linguistic scholarship.