Mulachar Ek Vivechan

Here is a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Mulachar: Ek Vivechan" by Sagarmal Jain, focusing on its analysis of the Mulachar text:

The provided text is an in-depth analysis of the Jain text Mulachar by Sagarmal Jain. The primary focus of this analysis is to determine the origin and tradition to which Mulachar belongs, challenging the assumption that it is exclusively a Digambar text.

Key Arguments and Findings:

1. Mulachar's Importance and Tradition:

   • Mulachar holds significant importance in the Digambar tradition, comparable to the Acharangasutra in the Shvetambar tradition. This is evidenced by the Dhavala and Jayadhavala commentaries, which cite verses from Mulachar as if they were from the Acharangasutra.
   • When the Acharangasutra was considered lost in the Digambar tradition, Mulachar began to be viewed as its replacement.
   • However, Mulachar presents certain facts that complicate its attribution solely to the Digambar tradition.

2. Challenges to Digambar Attribution:

   • Equality of Aryikas (Nuns) and Munis (Monks): The text emphasizes that Mulachar considers Aryikas as equal to Munis and prescribes liberation for them. This is seen as a significant obstacle to classifying it solely as a Digambar text, as the Digambar tradition generally prohibits female ordination and liberation.
   • Language and Style: While some aspects align with the Digambar tradition, Mulachar contains numerous verses (hundreds) in a Shauraseni Prakrit form, which are also found in Shvetambar canonical texts written in Ardhamagadhi and Maharashtri Prakrit. The language is neither pure Ardhamagadhi nor Maharashtri, indicating a blend or adaptation.
   • Absence in Shvetambar Tradition (as a Shvetambar Text): No Shvetambar canonical text in Shauraseni Prakrit is known to be directly cited in the Digambar tradition's Mulachar. However, the writing in Shauraseni Prakrit primarily occurred within the Achala (Shvetambar) tradition.

3. Evidence for the Yapaniya Tradition:

   • The author, Sagarmal Jain, drawing on the work of scholars like Dr. Upadhye and Pandit Nathuram Premi, proposes that Mulachar belongs to a third, intermediary tradition known as the Yapaniya tradition.
   • The Yapaniya tradition acted as a bridge between the Shvetambars and Digambars.
   • Yapaniya Proximity to Digambar: They emphasized achalakattva (non-possession of clothes) like the Digambars.
   • Yapaniya Proximity to Shvetambar: They also believed in female ordination and liberation, the existence of canonical texts, and, in exceptional circumstances, the use of clothes and utensils, which aligned them with the Shvetambar tradition.
   • Mulachar's content aligns with this duality, exhibiting similarities with both traditions.

4. Detailed Comparison with Shvetambar Texts (Evidence for Yapaniya Authorship):

   • Similar Verses with Bhagavati Aradhana: Numerous verses in Mulachar are identical or have similar meanings to those in the Bhagavati Aradhana. Pandit Nathuram Premi suggests Mulachar is from the tradition of Bhagavati Aradhana. The text argues that if Bhagavati Aradhana itself is a Yapaniya text, then Mulachar must also be.
   • Dependence on Shvetambar Nikayukti and Prakirnakas:
     • Mulachar incorporates a significant number of verses from Shvetambar canonical works like Brihat Pratyakhyana, Atur Pratyakhyana, Avasyak Niryukti, and Jivasamas.
     • Specifically, Mulachar's Brihat Pratyakhyana and Sankshipta Pratyakhyana sections contain many verses directly from the Shvetambar Atur Pratyakhyana and Maha Pratyakhyana.
     • The Shadavasayaka (Six Essentials) section of Mulachar shares over 80 verses with the Shvetambar Avasyak Niryukti.
     • It also shares verses with other Shvetambar texts like Uttaradhyayana, Anuyogadvara, and Dashavaikalika.
     • The Pindashuddhi section of Mulachar has verses that are almost identical to the Shvetambar Pind Niryukti.
   • Inclusion of Ten Kalpas: The mention of ten kalpas (disciplinary regulations) is identified as a concept accepted in Shvetambar doctrine, as discussed by Prabhachandra in Prameyakamalamartanda.
   • References to Acharkalpa and Jita Kalpa: Mulachar explicitly refers to Acharkalpa and Jita Kalpa, which are known Shvetambar canonical texts that describe monastic conduct and penances. Digambar sources also confirm that the Yapaniya read the Kalpasutra.
   • Specific Examples of Shared Verses and Concepts: The text provides detailed examples of shared verses and thematic similarities with Bhagavati Aradhana, Avasyak Niryukti, Uttaradhyayana, Dashavaikalika, and Pind Niryukti, reinforcing the argument for Shvetambar textual influence.

5. Rejection of Kundakunda's Authorship:

   • Pandit Nathuram Premi's argument against Kundakunda's authorship is supported. The text suggests Mulachar is not from Kundakunda's tradition but from the tradition that produced texts like Shivaraya and Aparajita.
   • The reasoning is that Kundakunda's tradition did not have these specific texts or the same acceptance of female liberation as seen in Mulachar.

6. The "Yapaniya" Tradition's Role:

   • The text concludes that Mulachar was composed within the Yapaniya Achala tradition, which existed between the Shvetambar and Digambar traditions.
   • This tradition studied and preserved Shvetambar canonical texts, which is why Mulachar shows such a strong resemblance to them.
   • The argument is made that any tradition that dismisses the existence of canonical texts cannot produce a work like Mulachar.
   • While the Digambar tradition in South India was discussing the "disappearance" of scriptures, the Yapaniya tradition, originating in North India and moving south, actively studied and taught canonical texts.

Conclusion:

The analysis strongly concludes that Mulachar is not a work of the Kundakunda lineage of the Digambar tradition. Instead, it is firmly placed within the Yapaniya Achala tradition. This tradition served as a vital link, bridging the doctrinal and literary worlds of the Shvetambars and Digambars, and Mulachar stands as a testament to this unique historical and intellectual synthesis. Its reliance on and incorporation of numerous Shvetambar canonical works are key indicators of its Yapaniya origins.