DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29591#0023
Introduction
19
there existed at the time of Devarddhi only one purva, or that
the whole of the drstivada was lost (vyavacchinna) at the date
1 000 after VIra. The question is, how these totally inconsistent
facts can be brought into connection with each other, and I must
confess that I have little hope that it will ever be possible wholly
to account for these discrepancies in the tradition, unless some
part or the whole of the drstivctda should really be recovered,
which seems to me to be not wholly incredible.
However, we must start from the fact that at present the
whole text is absolutely lost, including the purva's and four (or
three) other sections. The Jains themselves, strange as it seems,
give no convincing reason for the loss of what may be regarded
as the oldest and most venerable part of their sacred lore, and
various explanations of this startling fact have been attempted by
the most eminent Jain scholars in Europe. Weber, who returned
many times in the treatises so often cited here to this very im-
portant question, apparently thought the reason to be that the
drstivada was not in complete agreement with the tenets of the
orthodox doctrine, as representing a stage of the Jain creed much
previous to that of the time of the redaction. In fact, we know
that the drstivada accounted not only for the Jain doctrine, but
also for that of the Ajlvika s, i. e. the followers of Gosala Mani-
khaliputta, the rival of Mahavira, and of the Terdsiya (= Trdirdsilca),
the followers of Chaluya RohaguttaJ, from whom the Vaisesika-
philosophers are said by the Jains to draw their origin1 2. Now
Chaluya Rohagutta was the leader of the sixth schism in the Jain
community3, said to have occurred in 544 A. V. (= 17 or 77 B.
C.), and it is expressly stated in some accounts of this heresy
that Chaluya was the author of the Vaisesika-sutra’s, generally
known as Kanada or Kanabhaksa. Now the Vaisesika-system cer-
tainly did not exist in the time of Kautilya (300 B. C.)4, and the
present sutra’s are stated by Jacobi JAOS. XXXI, 1 ff. to have
1 Traditionally rendered by Saduluka Rohagupta; Saduluka appar-
ently contains a punning allusion to the Aulukya or Vdisesikadarsana.
But Chaluya is scarcely identical with Saduluka; however we find
Chaulu in Ind. Stud. XVII, 121.
2 Cp. Kalpas. ed. Jacobi p. 119; Leumann Ind. Stud. XVII, 121.
3 Cp. Leumann Ind. Stud. XVII, 116 ff.
4 Jacobi SBPrAW. 1911, p. 732 ff.
19
there existed at the time of Devarddhi only one purva, or that
the whole of the drstivada was lost (vyavacchinna) at the date
1 000 after VIra. The question is, how these totally inconsistent
facts can be brought into connection with each other, and I must
confess that I have little hope that it will ever be possible wholly
to account for these discrepancies in the tradition, unless some
part or the whole of the drstivctda should really be recovered,
which seems to me to be not wholly incredible.
However, we must start from the fact that at present the
whole text is absolutely lost, including the purva's and four (or
three) other sections. The Jains themselves, strange as it seems,
give no convincing reason for the loss of what may be regarded
as the oldest and most venerable part of their sacred lore, and
various explanations of this startling fact have been attempted by
the most eminent Jain scholars in Europe. Weber, who returned
many times in the treatises so often cited here to this very im-
portant question, apparently thought the reason to be that the
drstivada was not in complete agreement with the tenets of the
orthodox doctrine, as representing a stage of the Jain creed much
previous to that of the time of the redaction. In fact, we know
that the drstivada accounted not only for the Jain doctrine, but
also for that of the Ajlvika s, i. e. the followers of Gosala Mani-
khaliputta, the rival of Mahavira, and of the Terdsiya (= Trdirdsilca),
the followers of Chaluya RohaguttaJ, from whom the Vaisesika-
philosophers are said by the Jains to draw their origin1 2. Now
Chaluya Rohagutta was the leader of the sixth schism in the Jain
community3, said to have occurred in 544 A. V. (= 17 or 77 B.
C.), and it is expressly stated in some accounts of this heresy
that Chaluya was the author of the Vaisesika-sutra’s, generally
known as Kanada or Kanabhaksa. Now the Vaisesika-system cer-
tainly did not exist in the time of Kautilya (300 B. C.)4, and the
present sutra’s are stated by Jacobi JAOS. XXXI, 1 ff. to have
1 Traditionally rendered by Saduluka Rohagupta; Saduluka appar-
ently contains a punning allusion to the Aulukya or Vdisesikadarsana.
But Chaluya is scarcely identical with Saduluka; however we find
Chaulu in Ind. Stud. XVII, 121.
2 Cp. Kalpas. ed. Jacobi p. 119; Leumann Ind. Stud. XVII, 121.
3 Cp. Leumann Ind. Stud. XVII, 116 ff.
4 Jacobi SBPrAW. 1911, p. 732 ff.