Nyaya Kumudchandra Ka Prakkathana

Here is a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Prakathan (Preface) to Nyaya Kumudchandra, written by Sukhlal Sanghavi:

The author begins by stating that he would likely not be writing this preface were it not for the request of Shri Premiji, whom he considers one of his most open-minded Digambara friends, possessing a non-sectarian view despite his sectarian affiliation and a genuine desire for the upliftment of Digambara literature. His own involvement with the publication of Nyaya Kumudchandra also necessitates his contribution.

Sanghavi's relationship with the Digambara tradition began over thirty years prior during his studies, and this connection has deepened and broadened from both an external and internal perspective. Through this long association, he has observed and contemplated the Digambara tradition from literary and historical viewpoints with respect and utmost impartiality.

He identifies a noticeable contrast in the literary trends within the Digambara tradition between the medieval period and the later period. From esteemed Acharyas like Swami Samantabhadra and Akalanka up to Vadiraja, their literary mindset was remarkably liberal and absorptive. They studied and critically engaged with the vast and often rare literature of various Buddhist and Brahmanical philosophical schools. This intellectual openness allowed them to enrich their own literature with profound thought and critique. Sanghavi speculates that these accomplished Acharyas, while maintaining their asceticism and Digambara identity, likely amassed collections of books that included not only their own sect's literature but also significant works from Buddhist and Brahmanical traditions. They were not content with mere collection but actively engaged in the study and teaching of these texts, which enabled the clarity of thought and philosophical distinctions evident in their surviving works. They extracted the essence of contemporary Indian literature to create their own masterpieces.

However, after the medieval period, particularly from the 12th century onwards, this literary attitude underwent a significant change. Sanghavi points out that during this era, when Brahmanical scholars like Shriharsha, Gangesha, Pakshadhara, Madhusudana, Appadikhita, and Jagannatha were pioneering new developments in fields like Nyaya, Vedanta, Mimamsa, Alankara, and Grammar, the Digambara tradition remained largely untouched by this intellectual dynamism. This divergence from the intellectual spirit of their predecessors is, in Sanghavi's view, evidence of a shift in their mindset. He believes that the changed attitude of later scholars and Bhattarakas had a pervasive impact on the entire tradition, which is still evident in the collections of manuscripts, the study and teaching methodologies of present-day institutions, and the intellectual and working styles of scholarly circles.

Sanghavi laments that he has not encountered any old Digambara manuscript repositories or modern libraries that comprehensively house the literature of the Baudha, Brahmanical, and Shvetambara traditions, or even their most important works. Nor has he seen or heard of any Digambara institution that engages in a deep, holistic study and contemplation of all philosophical systems. He also notes the absence of scholarly editions or translations of valuable ancient Digambara texts that demonstrate the same breadth and impartiality as the original authors, or even a fraction of their effort.

He reflects on the inherent strengths of the Digambara tradition: its profound scriptural devotion, financial support, and a large number of intelligent scholars. When juxtaposed with the conveniences of the modern era and the literary pursuits of other Indian traditions, he concludes that the current state of Digambara literature is a direct consequence of a changed, constricted, or narrow-minded approach.

Sanghavi expresses a long-held desire for this constricted mindset within the Digambara tradition to change as quickly as possible. Without this change, he believes, the tradition cannot reclaim its historical and literary prominence or achieve an equal footing with other traditions in the current era. He is confident that if this shift in attitude occurs, the Digambara tradition possesses a legacy of a few, but exceptionally important, medieval texts upon which significant intellectual development can be built and integrated even today.

This conviction has compelled Sanghavi to focus on three key areas for the betterment of Digambara literature:

1. Publication of works by Samantabhadra, Akalanka, Vidyānanda, etc., in a manner that fosters broad understanding and makes them indispensable for scholars of other traditions.
2. Translation of texts like Aptamimamsa, Yuktyanushasana, Ashtashati, Nyayavinishchaya, etc., with originality, employing comparative and historical methodologies. This would reveal the extent of knowledge the original authors possessed up to their time, the sources they drew upon, and how the intellectual traditions within their works have evolved.
3. The creation of comprehensive libraries, thorough and systematic exploration of ancient manuscript collections, and a fundamental reform of modern study methodologies, as these are essential for achieving the first two goals.

Sanghavi explains that he had previously resolved to act rather than merely advise. He began translations, but they were set aside. During the editing of Sanmatitarka, he discovered previously unknown Digambara texts, including a commentary on Siddhivinishchaya. The manuscript of Nyaya Kumudchandra, indicated by the reference 'Shri', was provided by Shri Premiji, which solidified his resolve to produce a specialized edition. Premiji's persistent requests for his assistance, coupled with his own commitment, led to the decision to publish a comparative edition.

He recounts the ten-year delay in realizing this project due to his reluctance to take on too many large tasks simultaneously and his desire to involve capable Digambara scholars in the editing of works like Kumudchandra to foster self-sufficiency within the tradition. Despite attempts to bring scholars to Ahmedabad around 1926-27, they were unsuccessful. However, Premiji's persistent urging and Sanghavi's personal commitment fueled the project, with an opportunity finally arising in July 1933 upon arriving in Kashi.

He met with Pandits Kailashchandraji (an old acquaintance) and Mahendrakumarji (a new acquaintance) and found them to be suitable scholars for the task of editing "Kumud." Both enthusiastically embraced the work, and Premiji arranged the necessary logistical support. This collaboration has resulted in the present first volume.

Sanghavi believes that the commentaries in the presented volume are designed with two primary aims:

1. To present the philosophical viewpoints of other traditions (Buddhist and Brahmanical) that the author references, both favorably and unfavorably, in relation to Jain tenets. This includes citing their original texts to demonstrate the author's authenticity and allow students to understand the foundational texts and the true essence of those opposing views. This will enable students to comprehend the diverse philosophical points mentioned by Prabhachandra with great clarity and form their own independent opinions.
2. To provide material for the intellectual and literary history of each opinion. This is crucial for scholars of both philosophy and history.

He asserts that if students utilize the commentaries with both these perspectives in mind, they will be invaluable for all Digambara-Shvetambara Nyaya and Pramana texts, and will also help resolve numerous historical complexities within Buddhist and Brahmanical philosophical literature. For example, the commentaries on "Dharma" will reveal the foundational basis for the various aspects of Dharma as presented by the Jain author, as well as identify the traditions and their texts that propound and refute the different views on Dharma. This comprehensive information can inspire scholars to write a detailed history of Indian religious thought and conduct comparative analyses.

Sanghavi concludes by stating that this edition opens a new path for the publication of Digambara literature and can serve as a guide for future publications. It sets a standard for how superior editions of texts like Rajavartika, Tattvarthaślokavartika, and Ashtasahasri, which have previously had less satisfactory publications, should be produced.

He believes that with the proper study and teaching of such annotated texts, significant positive changes will occur. Students and scholars will be inspired to create comprehensive libraries, develop an interest in exploring diverse texts, and address the shortage of highly qualified translations of important ancient works. In essence, an era of making the unique and profound internal treasures of Digambara literature universally accessible will begin.

While acknowledging the appropriate arrangement of commentaries, Sanghavi points out a minor flaw that might be noticeable to impartial scholars. For instance, in the collection of citations on "Pramana," it is stated that the less developed definitions of Pramana are presented. However, during the organization of these definitions, the aspect of their developmental sequence and historicity was overlooked. He raises this point so that in future attempts to present material historically and developmentally, their significance is duly considered. However, he emphasizes that such a minor omission does not diminish the value of the present commentaries.

Finally, Sanghavi humbly requests all learned and open-minded Digambara scholars to dedicate themselves to scholarly pursuits and to urgently address the significant deficit of comprehensive Hindi translations. He also urges them to prepare editions of other important texts that are being overlooked, like Kumudchandra. He appeals to wealthy, knowledge-loving, and scripture-devoted Digambaras to provide maximum support to scholars undertaking such work.

Sanghavi clarifies that his preface is based solely on the first part (402 pages) of the printed Nyaya Kumudchandra. He notes that while he could have also discussed the literature and attitudinal shifts of the Sthanakvasi and Shvetambara sects of the Jain tradition, as well as the varying literary attitudes within the Brahmanical tradition, he has chosen to focus solely on the Digambara tradition as it is the subject of the publication, and the scope of such a brief preface does not allow for broader discussion.