Niryukti Sahitya Ek Punarchintan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the Jain text "Niryukti Sahitya Ek Punarchintan" by Sagarmal Jain, based on the provided pages:

Overview of Niryukti Literature: A Reconsideration

This work, "Niryukti Sahitya Ek Punarchintan," by Professor Sagarmal Jain, delves into the nature, categorization, authorship, and chronology of Niryukti literature within the Jain tradition. The author argues for a re-evaluation of existing theories, particularly regarding the authorship and dating of these ancient commentaries.

What are Niryuktis?

• Purpose: Niryuktis are considered the oldest form of commentary on the Jain Agamas (canonical scriptures). Their primary purpose is to clarify the meaning of specific, often technical, terms and subjects discussed within the Agamas. They serve to ascertain the contextually appropriate meaning of words, as many Jain terms hold specialized, rather than etymological, significance (e.g., "dharma" and "adharma" in the context of astikayas, or "syat" in Syadvada).
• Analogy to Vedic Literature: The author draws a parallel to the Vedic tradition, where "Nirukta" texts were written to explain the words of the Vedas. Similarly, Niryuktis are seen as the initial layer of explanation for Jain Agamas.
• Definition by Sharpenjtein: Quoting German scholar Sharpenjtein, Niryuktis are described as primarily functioning as a table of contents, briefly mentioning all detailed events.
• Forms of Agamic Commentary: Agamic explanatory literature can be broadly divided into five categories:
  1. Niryukti
  2. Bhashya
  3. Churni
  4. Sanskrit Vrattis and Tikas (commentaries and sub-commentaries)
  5. Tabba (explanations of Agamic words written in ancient Maru-Gurjar language). Modern commentaries are also being written in Hindi, Gujarati, and English.

Classification of Niryuktis

The text presents two classifications of Niryuktis:

• According to Anuyogdwar Sutra:

  1. Nikshetra-Niryukti: Clarifies technical terms based on the Nikshepa (placement) methodology.
  2. Ubodghat-Niryukti: Provides a preliminary explanation of the subject matter discussed in the Agama.
  3. Sutrasparshik-Niryukti: Mentions the subject matter of the Agama.

• According to Professor Ghatke (Indian Historical Quarterly):

  1. Pure Niryuktis: Unmixed by the influence of time (e.g., Niryuktis for Acharaanga and Sutrakrutanaga).
  2. Mixed but Separable Niryuktis: Contain mixtures of original Bhashyas but are still separable (e.g., Niryuktis for Dashavaikalika and Avasyaka Sutra).
  3. Bhashya-Mixed Niryuktis: Niryuktis that are now integrated within Bhashyas or Brihad Bhashyas, making them difficult to distinguish (e.g., Niryuktis for Nishitha).

Methodology of Niryuktis

• Nikshepa System: The primary basis for the explanatory style of Niryuktis is the Nikshepa system prevalent in Jain tradition. This system, comprising Nama (name), Sthapana (establishment), Dravya (substance), and Bhava (state), helps determine the meaning of a word in its specific context by eliminating irrelevant meanings and accepting the relevant one.
• Synonyms: Niryuktis also compile synonyms for important terms.
• Brief Overview of Studies: While not universally present, some Niryuktis provide a brief outline of the different studies (Adhyayanas) and sections (Uddeshakas) within the Agamas.

Major Niryuktis and Their Availability

The Avasyaka Niryukti mentions a list of ten Niryuktis:

1. Avasyaka Niryukti
2. Dashavaikalika Niryukti
3. Uttaradhyayana Niryukti
4. Acharaanga Niryukti
5. Sutrakrutanaga Niryukti
6. Dashashrutaskandha Niryukti
7. Brihatkalpa Niryukti
8. Vyavahara Niryukti
9. Surya Prajnapti Niryukti
10. Rishi Bhashita Niryukti

Currently, only eight of these are available. The author discusses the uncertainty surrounding the existence and disappearance of the last two, Surya Prajnapti and Rishi Bhashita Niryuktis.

Other Niryuktis and Their Status

• Pinda Niryukti and Ogha Niryukti: These are not independent works but are considered parts of Dashavaikalika Niryukti and Avasyaka Niryukti respectively. They have since become available as separate texts.
• Aradhana Niryukti: The author refutes the existence of an "Aradhana Niryukti" as a separate work, explaining that the mention in Moolachara refers to separate study of Aradhana (Prakirnaka or Bhagvati Aradhana) and Niryuktis in general.
• Govinda Niryukti: Attributed to Acharya Govinda, this Niryukti, which aimed to prove the existence of life in one-sensed beings (like earth, water, fire, air, and plants), is currently unavailable. It is believed to be related to the Acharaanga and Dashavaikalika sutras and was considered a "Darshan Prabhavak Granth" (scripture that strengthens philosophical views) because it likely aimed to refute Buddhist views.
• Sansakta Niryukti: This is considered a later and inconsistent work due to its mention of 84 Agamas and its limited 94 verses.

Order of Composition of the Ten Niryuktis

The author, based on internal references within the Niryuktis themselves, reconstructs a probable chronological order of their composition:

1. Avasyaka Niryukti (considered the earliest as it lists the others)
2. Dashavaikalika Niryukti
3. Uttaradhyayana Niryukti
4. Acharaanga Niryukti
5. Sutrakrutanaga Niryukti
6. Dashashrutaskandha Niryukti
7. Brihatkalpa Niryukti
8. Vyavahara Niryukti The composition of Surya Prajnapti and Rishi Bhashita Niryuktis remains uncertain.

Authorship and Time Period of Niryuktis

This is the most debated aspect, with the author engaging in a detailed critical analysis:

• Traditional View: Conventionally, the last Shrutakevali, the fourteen-purvadhar, and the author of the Chhedasutras, Aryabhadravahu I, is considered the author of the Niryuktis. Several ancient commentaries cite Bhadravahu as the author.
• Critique of the Traditional View: Professor Sagarmal Jain, leaning on the research of Muni Shri Punyavijayji, strongly challenges this traditional attribution. The core arguments against Bhadravahu I being the author include:
  • Mentions of Later Acharyas: Niryuktis contain explicit references to Acharyas like Aryasinghagiri, Aryavajraswami, Aryarakshit, Kalakacharya, and others who lived centuries after Bhadravahu I.
  • Chronological Discrepancies: The Niryuktis mention events and individuals (like the seven Nihnavas and the Botika sect) that occurred hundreds of years after Bhadravahu I's time.
  • Philosophical Developments: The absence of concepts like Gunasthana (stages of spiritual development) in Niryuktis, which were developed by the time of Tattvarthasutra (3rd-4th century CE), suggests an earlier composition than traditionally believed.
  • Inconsistencies in Lineage: Mentions of Ārṣabha and Āryavajraswami in Niryuktis, and the lineage presented in the Kalpasutra Sthaviravali, create contradictions if attributed to the fourteen-purvadhar Bhadravahu.
  • Attribution of Verses: Verses found in Niryuktis are also found in later commentaries like the Bhashyas and Sanghanis, suggesting that Niryuktis might be earlier or contemporary with these, not necessarily from the time of Bhadravahu I.
• The "Bhadravahu" Conundrum: The author proposes that the name "Bhadravahu" became associated with Niryuktis due to confusion between the fourteen-purvadhar Bhadravahu and other individuals named Bhadravahu, particularly Naimittika Bhadravahu, the brother of the astronomer Varahamihira (living around the 6th century CE).
• Arguments Against Naimittika Bhadravahu: Despite the allure of a horoscope scholar writing about Surya Prajnapti, the author finds significant evidence against Naimittika Bhadravahu being the author. This includes:
  • References in earlier texts: Nandi Sutra and Pakshikasutra mention Niryuktis before the 6th century CE.
  • Absence of later developments: Niryuktis do not reflect later philosophical or textual developments from the 6th century onwards.
  • Anachronisms: If Naimittika Bhadravahu were the author, Niryuktis would likely mention events or Acharyas from the period between the 3rd and 6th centuries CE, which they do not.
• Alternative Authorship: Aryabhadra (Gautama Gotra): Based on the Kalpasutra Sthaviravali, the author presents a compelling case for Aryabhadra, the disciple of Aryakalaka (Gautama Gotra), as the most probable author of the Niryuktis.
  • Chronological Fit: This Aryabhadra lived around the 3rd-4th century CE, aligning with the estimated period of Niryukti composition and the Mathuri Vacana.
  • Tradition and Acceptance: His lineage and the acceptance of his works in both Shvetambara and Yapaniya traditions, as well as the mention of his disciple Siddhasena, support this attribution.
  • Resolution of Discrepancies: This attribution helps resolve many of the contradictions and anachronisms found in the Niryuktis, particularly those related to later Acharyas and events. The author suggests that some later verses mentioning Aryarakshit and the Nihnavas might be interpolations.
• Other "Bhadra" Acharyas: The author also considers Aryabhadra Gupta (disciple of Aryashivabhuti), another Acharya named Bhadra, but finds issues with this attribution due to the detailed and respectful mentions of Aryarakshit, who was believed to be Bhadra Gupta's successor.

Conclusion and Future Research

Professor Sagarmal Jain concludes that the traditional attribution of Niryuktis to the fourteen-purvadhar Bhadravahu is incorrect, as is the attribution to Naimittika Bhadravahu. He proposes that Aryabhadra (Gautama Gotra) is the most likely author.

The author acknowledges that the Niryuktis have undergone interpolations and admixtures of Bhashya verses over time, making the task of separating original verses challenging. He expresses hope that future scholars will further investigate and resolve the remaining issues in Niryukti literature. The author's conclusions are presented as a result of his personal research and may differ from those of scholars like Muni Punyavijayji. He emphasizes that his findings are not definitive and welcomes further critical review and research.