Umaswati Ka Kal

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Umaswati ka Kal" by Sagarmal Jain, focusing on determining the period of Acharya Umaswati:

The text "Umaswati ka Kal" by Sagarmal Jain attempts to pinpoint the historical period of Acharya Umaswati. The author's primary approach involves analyzing Umaswati's seminal work, the Tattvarthasutra, and its commentaries, as well as other Jain scriptures and historical records, particularly epigraphs.

Key Arguments and Evidence for Umaswati's Period:

• Absence of Developed Concepts: The text highlights that Umaswati's works do not present the fully developed forms of the Saptabhangi (seven-fold predication) and Gunsthana (stages of spiritual development) doctrines. While some technical terms related to Gunsthanas are present, suggesting these concepts were evolving, Umaswati predates their final crystallization.
• Commentaries on Tattvarthasutra:
  • The oldest commentaries in the Shvetambara tradition is considered the Tattvartha-Bhashya, and in the Digambara tradition, it's Sarvarthasiddhi.
  • The Tattvartha-Bhashya lacks clear concepts of Gunsthanas and Saptabhangi, whereas Sarvarthasiddhi provides a detailed explanation of Gunsthanas.
  • Acharya Akalanka, a later commentator, is the first to present full details of Saptabhangi (in the fourth chapter of his Tattvartha-Raja-Varttika) and Gunsthana (in the ninth chapter).
• Other Scriptural Mentions: The concepts of Jivathana (in the Shvetambara scripture Samavayanga), Jivasamaasa (in the Yapaniya texts like Shatkhandagama), and Gunathana (in Kundakunda's works) are mentioned in texts generally dated around the 5th century CE. This places the composition of Tattvarthasutra before the 5th century CE.
• Absence of Sectarian Names: Crucially, the text emphasizes that the sectarian names like Shvetambara, Digambara, and Yapaniya did not exist before the 5th century CE. The earliest mentions of these distinct monastic orders (Nirgrantha Sangha, Shvetapatta Mahashramana Sangha, and Yapaniya Sangha) are found in inscriptions from the 5th century CE (Halsi inscriptions). This strongly suggests that Tattvarthasutra, which predates these clear sectarian divisions, was composed before the 5th century CE.
• Union of Sanghas: The text suggests that Tattvarthasutra was composed before the clear division of monastic orders. The varying alignment of its core texts with either the Digambara, Shvetambara, or Yapaniya traditions indicates its pre-sectarian origin.
• Historical Alignments and Debates:
  • Some scholars, like Shri Kapadia, place Tattvarthasutra between the 1st and 4th centuries CE.
  • Professor Winternitz believes Umaswati lived in an era when the Shvetambara and Digambara sects were not fully separated in North India, and Tattvarthasutra clearly predates this sectarian division.
  • The text discusses the dispute over the use of clothes and bowls starting from the 2nd century CE. Literary information from the Aavashyak Moolbhashya indicates the origin of the "Botikas" (a reference to the divergence of cloth-wearing and non-cloth-wearing traditions) 609 years after Nirvana (Vir Nirvana Samvat). The dispute between Arya Krishna and Arya Shiva occurred in VN 609, but the formal schism happened through their disciples, Kaundinya or Kottavirya.
  • If Nirvana is considered 470 years before Vikram Samvat (with a potential 60-year discrepancy), and considering the synchronicity of Chandragupta, Ashoka, and Samprati with Bhadrabahu and Suhasti, it places Nirvana around 410 years before Vikram Samvat.
  • This implies a schism around VN 609 - 410 = 199 Vikram Samvat. Including the 60-year period for Kaundinya and Kottavirya, the schism would be around 259 Vikram Samvat (late 3rd century CE). Distinct Shvetambara and Yapaniya traditions would have developed about a century after this, around the 5th century CE.
• Epigraphic Evidence:
  • The Prashasti (preface) of the Tattvartha-Bhashya mentions Umaswati belonged to the Uchchaihgar branch. This branch is mentioned as Ucchanagari in the Kalpasutra.
  • This branch originated from Arya Shantishenika, who was a spiritual brother of Arya Vajra's guru. Arya Vajra's demise is dated to VN 584. This places Arya Shantishenika's lifetime between VN 470 and 550, suggesting the Ucchanagari branch's origin in the latter half of the 1st century CE or early 2nd century CE.
  • Inscriptions from Mathura (Shaka Samvat 5, corresponding to 140 Vikram Samvat) mention the Uchchaihgar branch. Inscriptions with Kanishka, Huvishka, and Vasudeva (78-176 CE, or 135-233 Vikram Samvat) align with this period (late 2nd to early 3rd century CE).
  • Umaswati, being from this branch, would have lived after this period.
  • Umaswati mentions his spiritual preceptors, Ghoshnandi Shraman and Guru Shivashri. The text finds a mention of a disciple of Ganin Uggahini named Vachak Ghoshaka from the Sthanikakula in Mathura inscriptions. Sthanikakula is part of the Kotikagana, a branch of which is Ucchanagari. The presence of Arya Krishna and Arya Shiva in Kushana-era Mathura inscriptions, with Arya Krishna's inscription dated to Shaka Samvat 15, places them around 230 Vikram Samvat. The dispute between Arya Krishna and Arya Shiva (VN 609) aligns with this, suggesting Arya Shiva lived in the first half of the 3rd century CE.
  • If Arya Shiva is considered Umaswati's preceptor, then Umaswati would have lived in the first half of the 3rd century CE. However, inscriptions from the late 3rd to early 4th century CE do not mention the sectarian divisions.
• Synthesis and Conclusion: The author concludes that Umaswati lived during the period when the disputes over clothes and bowls had begun (around the 3rd century CE), but before the distinct Shvetambara, Digambara, and Yapaniya traditions had fully formed. The clear establishment of these sects, their doctrinal differences, and their specific names emerged in the 5th century CE or later. Umaswati is firmly placed before these developments, during a transitional period when these sects and their beliefs were solidifying.

Overall Consensus: Based on the presented evidence, the author places Acharya Umaswati between the late 3rd century CE and the early 4th century CE. He was a contemporary of the early stages of sectarian divergence but predated the formal establishment and naming of the distinct Shvetambara, Digambara, and Yapaniya traditions.