Param Yogiraj Anandghanji Maharaj Ashtasahasri Padhate The

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text in English:

The text, likely an excerpt from a scholarly journal or publication titled "Anusandhan 36," discusses the life and affiliations of the revered Jain scholar and mystic, Param Yogiraj Anandghanji Maharaj. The author, Vinaysagar, aims to clarify historical points and affiliations related to Anandghanji, referencing earlier works and presenting new evidence.

Key Points and Arguments:

• Previous Scholarship: The author acknowledges the detailed biographical works on Anandghanji by Shri Buddhisagar Suriji Maharaj ("Anandghan Pad Sangrah Bhavarth") and Motichand Girdharlal Kapadia ("Anandghanji Na Pado Bhag 1-2"). Both acknowledge Anandghanji's initial name as Labhanand, Labhanandi, or Labhavijay, and his residence in Merta. However, they identify him as belonging to the Tapagacch.

• Challenge to Tapagacch Affiliation: The author highlights the dissenting opinion of the late Shri Bhanwar Lalji Nahata, presented in the introduction to "Anandghan Chauvisi" (edited by Muni Sahajanandghan). Nahata, after extensive research, presents strong evidence that Anandghanji actually belonged to the Khartargacch.

• The Crucial Letter: The core of the discussion revolves around a rediscovered letter. Nahata mentions in his work that the author (Vinaysagar), then known as Upadhyay Vinaysagar, had received a letter from Muni Punyavijayji in Ahmedabad in 1952. This letter, which Nahata believed was in Vinaysagar's collection, was not immediately locatable by Nahata. Vinaysagar confirms that he did possess the letter and, after a thorough search, has now rediscovered it. A verbatim copy of this letter is attached to the publication.

• Content of the Letter:

  • Recipient: The letter is addressed to Shri Jinachandrasuriji, the successor to Shri Jinaratnasuriji, who was residing in Surat.
  • Sender: It was written from Merta by Upadhyay Punyakalashji, accompanied by a retinue of disciples including Shri Jayaranga, Shri Tilakchandra, and Shri Charitrachandra.
  • Date: The letter is dated Ashoj Sud 12, though the year is not specified. However, based on Jinachandrasuri's tenure as Acharya (1700-1711 Vikram Samvat), the letter is placed within this period.
  • Structure: The letter begins with 14 verses in Sanskrit's Shardulvikridit meter, praising the Acharya. The bulk of the letter is in Rajasthani.
  • Key Information:
    • Upadhyay Punyakalashji and his disciples are observing their Chaturmas in Merta.
    • There are mentions of religious observances during Paryushan.
    • A significant request is made for the Acharya to grant permission for a move (vihar) towards Nagaur, a request previously made.
    • The most crucial point: The letter states that Pandit Sugunchand is studying Ashtasahasri from Labhanandji (Anandghanji's earlier name). This indicates that Labhanandji was actively teaching this complex philosophical text, demonstrating his profound scholarship. The text emphasizes that Ashtasahasri is an advanced philosophical work that requires deep contemplation to teach, confirming Labhanandji's high level of intellect and mastery. Sugunchand is also described as a capable scholar who is happily studying.

• Anandghanji's Transformation and Universality: The author posits that while Anandghanji was known as Labhanand, he likely remained affiliated with the Khartargacch. However, upon renouncing all worldly possessions, name, and affiliations to become the avadhuta (liberated soul) Anandghan, he became free from all sect (gacch) affiliations and universally respected. His works, the Chauvisi and Pado, are filled with deep philosophical and mystical insights, making them universally appealing and not tied to any specific lineage.

• Editor's Note (Potential Discrepancy and Oral Tradition):

  • The editor's note acknowledges that both Tapagacch and Khartargacch claim Anandghanji. Dr. Kumarpal Desai's research is mentioned as having discussed this, suggesting that the debate highlights Anandghanji's widespread acceptance.
  • It also notes that monks from different gachchs traditionally studied under scholars from other gachchs.
  • A significant anecdote is shared about Acharya Vijaynemisuriji. While documenting his life, a tradition was found stating that the highly learned Upadhyay Shri Dharmasagarji Maharaj of the Tapagacch used to receive instructions on the Bhagavati Sutra from Anandghanji. This is presented as a curious detail, as Dharmasagarji was older and senior in initiation. It's suggested that perhaps Anandghanji possessed some unique secret knowledge that drew such an elderly and learned scholar to him. The editor acknowledges this might be hearsay but doesn't dismiss it entirely.

Conclusion:

The text presents a strong case, primarily through the rediscovered letter, for Anandghanji's initial affiliation with the Khartargacch (under his name Labhanand). It highlights his exceptional scholarship through his teaching of Ashtasahasri. The author concludes that upon his spiritual transformation into Anandghan, he transcended sectarian boundaries to become a universally revered Yogi-king. The editor's note adds further context by mentioning differing views on his gachch affiliation and a fascinating piece of oral tradition regarding his learning being sought by a senior monk from another gachch.