Tarkik Shiromani Acharya Siddhasen Diwakar - Book Summary

Here's a comprehensive summary in English of the provided Jain text, "Tarkik Shiromani Acharya Siddhasen Diwakar," by Sagarmal Jain:

This text is an in-depth exploration of the life, works, and historical context of Acharya Siddhasen Diwakar, a prominent Jain philosopher. The author, Sagarmal Jain, aims to clarify the controversies surrounding Siddhasen Diwakar's era, lineage, and authorship, critically engaging with the findings of previous scholars.

Key Points and Arguments:

1. Siddhasen Diwakar's Significance:

Siddhasen Diwakar is considered a foremost scholar of Jain philosophy.
He is credited with the logical establishment of the doctrine of Anekantavada (non-absolutism) within Jainism, placing him as a pioneer in this area.
He was also a collector and critic of Indian philosophy in general, offering logical reviews of various philosophical schools in his works.

2. Chronology and Historical Context (The Debate on his Era):

There are significant disagreements among scholars regarding Siddhasen Diwakar's timeline.
While traditional views place him in the 5th century CE, the author leans towards the 4th century CE, citing his role as the first to logically establish Anekantavada.
The text discusses the influence of the Mathura inscriptions mentioning Arya Vriddhahasti, potentially placing him in the latter half of the 3rd century CE and Siddhasen in the late 3rd to early 4th century CE.
The author considers him contemporary to Chandragupta II (Vikramaditya), aligning him with the late 4th century CE.
The mention of his commentary on Siddhasen's Sanmatitarka by Mallavadi (circa 884 Nirvana Era) suggests Sanmatitarka was written in the early 5th century CE, further supporting Siddhasen's presence in the late 4th century CE.
The reference to his views in Pujyapada Devanandi's Jainendra Vyakarana (5th-6th century CE) confirms he lived before the 5th-6th century CE.
The author concludes that Siddhasen Diwakar's period likely falls between the latter half of the 3rd century CE and the first half of the 5th century CE.
He critiques the arguments of scholars like Pandit Sukhlal, Prof. A.N. Upadhye, and Pandit Jugal Kishore Mukhtar, noting their conflicting conclusions and the deepening of disputes.

3. Siddhasen Diwakar's Lineage and Tradition:

Prof. A.N. Upadhye argued for Siddhasen's affiliation with the Yapaniya tradition, citing the use of "Shrutakevali" by Acharya Haribhadra for Siddhasen, a term often associated with Yapaniya acharyas.
The author refutes this, stating that "Shrutakevali" was also used for ancient Shvetambara acharyas.
Another argument for Yapaniya affiliation is the contradiction of Sanmatitarka with Shvetambara Agamas. The author argues this highlights Siddhasen's desire to logically present Agamas in a new light and address internal inconsistencies, rather than implying a different tradition.
The author states that Sanmatitarka's contradiction with Agamas does not make him an opponent of Agamas or Yapaniya.
The text emphasizes that before the formal establishment of Shvetambara, Digambara, and Yapaniya sects, there was a broader "Nirgrantha" (ascetic) tradition in North India, from which both Shvetambara and Yapaniya evolved.
The author suggests Siddhasen belonged to the Vidyadhara branch (Koti Gana), which predates the sectarian divisions and is considered an ancestor by both Shvetambara and Yapaniya traditions.
The mention of a "Mahavir's married" indication in one of his "Dvattriṃśikā" (thirty-two verse compositions) by Digambara scholars is dismissed by the author as an attempt to attribute it to another Siddhasen, as Yapaniyas also accepted the Kalpa Sutra, which contains such indications.

4. Siddhasen Diwakar's Identity: Digambara or Shvetambara?

Pandit Jugal Kishore Mukhtar attempted to prove Siddhasen as a Digambara acharya, based on the absence of his mention in Shvetambara "Prabandhas" (biographical accounts) and the mention of his work by Digambara acharyas like Jinasena.
The author counters that the absence of mention in Prabandhas is likely due to Sanmatitarka's critique of Agamic Karma theory, which Shvetambara acharyas might have wanted to suppress due to sectarian differences.
The author argues that the absence of critique of women's liberation, kevalibhakti (liberation while alive), and clothed liberation in his works does not automatically make him Digambara.
The author firmly states that Siddhasen was not Digambara. The lack of mention of his biography in Digambara texts and its detailed presence in Shvetambara tradition, along with accounts of his temporary expulsion from the Sangha, suggest he belonged to the Shvetambara current.
The author points out that Digambara acharyas referred to him as "dwesya-sitapat" (hated-clothed) but never claimed him as their own. There is no clear mention of Sanmatitarka's author as belonging to the Digambara tradition.
The use of Maharashtri Prakrit in Sanmatitarka is a strong indicator that he is not Digambara or Yapaniya, as these traditions predominantly used Shauraseni Prakrit for their works.

5. Siddhasen Diwakar's Works and Authorship:

The text acknowledges that not all works attributed to Siddhasen Diwakar are definitively his, as there were other Jain scholars named Siddhasen.
Sanmatitarka (or Sanmati Prakaran) is unequivocally considered his major work, composed in Maharashtri Prakrit influenced by Ardhamagadhi Agamas.
The Dvattriṃśikā (collections of 32 verses) are also largely attributed to him, though some may predate his conversion.
Nyayavatara is a highly debated work. While many Shvetambara scholars (Pandit Sukhlal, Bechardas, Dalsukh Malvania) attribute it to Siddhasen, scholars like M.A. Dhaky consider it the work of Siddharshi.
The author, Sagarmal Jain, argues in favor of Siddhasen's authorship of Nyayavatara, citing:
- The presence of "Dvattriṃśikā" in the collection.
- The fact that later acharyas like Haribhadra wrote different types of stotras but not Dvattriṃśikā.
- The mention of "Abhranta" in the definition of "Pratyaksha" (direct perception), which is also found in earlier Buddhist texts (Asanga, 3rd-4th century CE), making it not an anachronism for Siddhasen.
- The finding of Nyayavatara verses in Haribhadra's works, suggesting Nyayavatara predates Haribhadra and therefore Siddharshi (7th century CE).
- The commentary by Shantisuri clearly stating "Siddhasenarka sutritam" (authored by Siddhasena-Surya), with "Arka" being a synonym for Diwakar.
- The impact of Siddhasen's logic on later scholars like Pātrasavadi (Digambara) and Haribhadra.
- The inherent structure of Nyayavatara as a foundational text of Jain logic, predating the development of the three proofs (Smriti, Pratyabhijna, Tarka) discussed by later acharyas like Akalanka.
The author also addresses other attributed works, clarifying that Jitakalpa Churni, Tattvartha Adhigama Sutra Vritti, and Chakrastav are likely works of Siddhasenagani or Siddharshi, not Siddhasen Diwakar.
The Kalyana Mandira Stotra is also questioned as his work.
The author clarifies that the Dvattriṃśikā mentioning Mahavir's marriage should not be taken as proof of a different Siddhasen, as accepting the Kalpa Sutra was common to Shvetambaras and Yapaniyas.

6. Siddhasen Diwakar's Philosophical Contributions:

His primary contribution is the logical establishment of Anekantavada, demonstrating its compatibility with Agamic principles.
He addressed internal contradictions within Agamas and sought to reconcile them through logic.
He discussed the concepts of Karma and Krama-vada (sequentialism) and Yugapad-vada (simultaneity), attempting to find a balance.
His emphasis on Abhedavada (non-duality) in the context of knowledge and perception is seen as an attempt to resolve the conflict between Krama-vada and Yugapad-vada, supporting the Agamic statement that knowledge is beginningless but eternal.

Conclusion:

Sagarmal Jain's work meticulously analyzes the available evidence, debates scholarly opinions, and asserts that Acharya Siddhasen Diwakar was a pivotal figure in Jain philosophy, primarily active in the 4th century CE. He was a staunch advocate of Anekantavada and a keen logical analyst of Indian philosophical thought. The author concludes that Siddhasen Diwakar was not Digambara or Yapaniya but belonged to the earlier Nirgrantha tradition in North India that served as the precursor to the Shvetambara and Yapaniya lineages, and that his major works, including Sanmatitarka and likely Nyayavatara, firmly establish his place in the history of Jain thought.