TATTVÄRTHA STUDIES III (SUMMARY)
By Bansidhar Bhatt, Berlin
§ 1. Introduction
The Tattvärtha- (or Tattvärthädhigama- ) Sütra, composed in Sanskrit and
following the model of the Brahmanical sütras, is the earliest available work
of this kind in Jaina literature. In its present form, it consists of ten adhyä¬
yas. Its two versions - Svetämbara (344 sütras) and Digambara (3 57 sütras )-
show divergencies of various kinds. Both versions are ascribed to Umäsväti
(ca. 2nd. century A.D. ), whom the Digambaras call Umäsvämin (or Grdhra-
piccha). The earliest commentary on the Tattvärtha-Sütra is the so-called
Svopajna-Bhäsya. Both, Sütra and Bhäsya, consist of more than one layer as
demonstrated in an article published in 1974 (Tattvärtha Studies I - II, Adyar
Library Bulletin, Vol. 38, Mahävira Jayanti Volume, pp. 64-83, see in
particular pp. 71 foil. ). The Bhäsya (Sütra-cum-Bhäsya) as preserved by
the Svetämbaras is accompanied by two "extensions", one preceding Chapter
1 (Extension I, see § 2) and one following Chapter 10 (Extension II, see
§ 3).
The Digambara author Devanaindin alias Püjyapäda (ca. 6th. century A.D. )
wrote a commentary on the Tattvärtha-Sütra, called Sarvärthasiddhi. Amongst
the later Digambara commentators, Akalahka (9th.-10th. century, Räjavär-
tika) and Vidyänanda ( 10th.-11th. century, Slokavärtika) are worthy of note.
Both comment upon the Sarvärthasiddhi. We can trace back many phrases of
these Digambara commentaries (especially of Devanandin's Sarvärthasiddhi
and Akalanka's Räjavärtika) to the Svopajna-Bhäsya, although this work is not
mentioned by them. In the case of the two Extensions, the situation is different.
Details of their position in the Digambara literature will be supplied in §§ 2-3
below .
y
The earliest and most important Svetämbara commentaries are those com¬
posed by Siddhasena ganin (different from Siddhasena Diväkara) and Hari¬
bhadra. Both authors probably lived in the 8th. century A.D., and their com¬
mentaries are known as Tikäs. However, Haribhadra's commentary reaches
only up to 6.22 and was completed by later authors; the complete work is
known as Dupadupikä (-Tikä). The Svetämbaras ascribed the Bhäsya, in¬
cluding Extensions I and II, to Umäsväti ("Svopajna-Bhäsya") and based their
exegetical tradition on it. It is only in connection with the two Tikas and other
Svetämbara commentaries that the Svopajna-Bhäsya has been transmitted.
We always quote from the Surat edition (SrT-Tattvärtha-sütram, 1936) which
supplies Sütra-cum-Bhäsya (as well as the two Extensions).
§ 2. Extension I
Extension I (Surat ed. pp. 1-3) consists of 31 verses in the Äryä metre
(only the metre of vs. 26 is Visesaka). The colophon runs "iti sambandha-
kärikäh" or "Tattvärtha-kärikäh ... samäptäh". Also compare Siddhasena
ganin: "... sästra-sambandhah. sa cäyam bhäsya-kärikäbhih prakäsyate. "
A close study of the text showed that vss. 11, 21-22 have the character of
namaskära verses added to the Bhäsya (Sütra-cum-Bhäsya), while the re-
mainig verses (l-lO, 12-20, 23-31) merely comment upon this namaskära
triplet. The author of the commentary verses (l-lO etc. ) quotes and utilizes
the Bhäsya (i.e. the Bhäsya as existing in his day). Vss. 1-10 (excellence
of and homage to the arhats) and 12-20 (spiritual biography of Mahävira) are
directly connected with the triplet, while vss. 23-31 discuss the purpose and
nature of the Bhäsya.
Our analysis is supported by several early Svetämbara authors, who all
ignore some of the commentary verses. Haribhadra does not comment upon
(or even mention) vs. 25; the same is true of Siddhasena ganin with respect
to vss. 2, 5, 6, 10, 12-20 (!), 23, 25-26, 29-31; and of Devagupta with
respect to vs. 25. (A partial commentary composed by a certain Devagupta
has been transmitted along with Siddhasena ganin's Tikä. ) Moreover, Hari¬
bhadra considers vss. 24 and 26 as unauthentic. Devagupta distinguishes
between his commentary on vss. 1-31 ( "Kärikä-Tikä" ) and his - proposed -
commentary on the Tattvärtha ( "Sästra-Tikä" ). These designations probably
indicate a departure from the attitude of the other Svetämbara authors who
thought of the two Extensions as parts of the Bhäsya.
In contrast to the Bhäsya proper and Extension II, vss. 1-31 are not re¬
flected in the Digambara commentaries. There is apparently only one ex¬
ception to this: Akalanka quotes in his commentary on Tattvärtha 1.1 from
vs. 31, criticizing in the same context - and in unequivocal terms - Ex¬
tension I (refutation of "sambandha", to be understood as a rejection of the
"Sambandha-Kärikäs" ).
§ 3. Extension II
Extension II consists of the following Sections: -
(a) Short summary of the Bhäsya (i.e. of Chs. I-IO) in prose: Surat ed.
p. 119^ line 9 to p. 12l''^ line 1 (in the Surat edition, each page is split
into two columns, our letters "A" und "B").
(b) 32 anustubh verses (Surat ed. p. 121^ line 2 to p. 123^ line 5). These
verses form a commentary on Tattvärtha-Sütra Ch. 10. However, verses
23-32 (they may be designated as "sukha-tract" ) are not in continuation
of the text preceding them.
(c) Prose passage on the subject of "krama-mukti" (Surat ed. p. 123"^
lines 5-13).
(d) Five Aryas (author prasasti: Umäsväti and his spiritual lineage, etc. )
and one Äryä (sravanaphala); Surat ed. p. 123"^ line 13 to p. 123^ line
9. Strictly speaking, these verses are to be connected directly wi4;h the
work proper (Sütra-cum-Bhäsya).
In the Digambara tradition. Extension II is connected with the Räjavärtika
(Akalarika) and the Tattvärthasära (Amrtacandra, ca. 10th. century A . D .).
Sections (a) and (b) are found at the end of the former work, but they were
not composed by Akalanka himself. An additional verse (33) describes the 32 verses as a "bhäsya". In the case of the Tattvärthasära it is certain that
the relevant elements (Section "b", see below) were neither composed nor
incorporated by Amrtacandra himself. Sections (c) and (d) are not found in
Digambara works.
Section (d) probably consists of three different parts (vss. 1-3, 4-5, and
6). The phrase "avyäbädha-sukha" in vs. 6 recurs in the sukha-tract of
Section (b), see vs. 23; it is also reminiscent of a passage in Section (a),
see p. 121^ line 14 to p. 121^ line 1.
The analysis of Sections (a) to (c) is beset with difficulties. Section (c)
has no connection with the preceding text (Section "b") and starts with "yas
tv idänim". It is probably the displaced continuation of the Bhäsya on Ch.
10.6 which should appear after "niskriya iti" ( = end of the present Bhäsya
on 10.6). - Vss. 1-32 (Section "b" ) are possibly the only remainder of
a complete metrical commentary on the Sütras, running parallel to theBhSsya
(which is in prose throughout). Section (b) is not homogeneous but consists
of seversd parts. We have to distinguish between vss. 1-22 on the one hand
and vss. 23-32 on the other. Again vss. 19-20 are a later addition in the first
block (vss. 1-22), while vs. 31 is a spurious element in the second block
(vss. 23-32). 80-90% of the text of the original verses as found in the first
block recur - in prose form - in the Bhäsya. In the case of vss. 19-20,
the spurious character is demonstrated mainly by external evidence (see
below). Vs. 31 presents Nyäya elements which are not in keeping with the
old Tattvärtha tradition. In the case of the second block or "sukha-tract",
it has not yet been possible to establish a textual connection with the Bhäsya.
Also its position vis-a-vis the first block is not clear. - The inclusion of
vss. 1-32 into the Tattvärthasära of Amrtacandra has not yet been explained
in detail. The Tattvärthasära is a comparatively short metrical work, supply¬
ing mainly the Sütra text with interwoven glosses. Its 8th. Chapter corresponds
to Chapter 10 of the Sütras. Out of the 32 verses of Section (b) all except vss.
19-20 have been inserted by a later hand into Tattvärthasära Ch. 8 (ibid. vss.
7, 20-36, 43-54). The vss. 19-20 of our Section (b) - on the unexpected
subject of prägbhära, i.e. Isatprägbhärä - are probably an accretion based
on a canonical passage (see inter alia the Aupapätika: Leu mann , Uvaväi ya
§ 167). - Section (a) is possibly a self-contained composition, interrupted
by a "middle-portion" elaborating the summary text immediately preceding
it (more particularly the expression "rddhi-vise^än" ). The middle-portion
deals with supernatural powers (Surat ed. p. 120-'^ line 13 to p. 121 •'^ line 5),
which are nowhere mentioned in the Sütra-cum-Bhäsya. This middle portion
is not found in the Räjavärtika of Akalahka (see the end of Ch. 10, p. 649 of
the edition, line after " rddhi-visesa-yuktah"). All this shows the spurious
character of the middle-portion.
§ 4. Conspectus
Extension I: vss. 1-10
11 12-20 21-22 23-31.
Text Proper: Sütra-cum-Bhäsya (Chapters 1-10), prose.
Extension II: Section (a) , summary (ineluding "middle-portion"), prose.
Section (b) , vss. 1-32, metrical commentary (ineluding the
"sukha-tract" ).
Section (c) , "krama-mukti passage" (part of the Bhäsya), prose.
Section (d) , vss. 1-3, 4-5, 6.
§ 5. Tattvärtha 10.7 (Sütra-cum-Bhäsya)
Sütra 7 is not mentioned in the metrical commentary (Section "b" ) or in
the summary (Section "a"). The sütra is fairly long and presents a rare
version of the naya doctrine. It is no doubt contained in all versions (Sve¬
tämbara and Digambara). However, in the Dupadupikä the second block
(composed by Haribhadra's successors) reaches only up to 10.6. This fact
as well as the character of the connecting phrase (supplied by the author
who commented upon 10.7 and Extension II) add to our doubts regarding the
originality of 10.7.
It may be mentioned in this connection that the commentary written by the
anonymous author of the last part of the Dupadupikä in no way facilitates the
analysis of Extension II.
The large number of works based on the Tattvärtha-Sütra presents a rare
occasion to study the literary processes which determined the final shape
of the "Tattvärtha- Literature" . It would appear that the whole literary material
- down to single passages and phrases - has to be studied step by step and
with constant reference to parallel sources within the Tattvärtha corpus (1).
1. I am indebted to Prof. Bruhn (Berlin) who discussed with me the final
form of the present summary.
§ 6. Bibliography
1. Sr"-Tattvärthasütram. Published by Rgabhadevaji Kesarlmalaji Jaina
Svetämbara Samsthä, Ratalam, printed in Surat 1936.
2. Sarvärthasiddhi of Devanandin. Edited by Pt. Phülacandra , Banaras.
Bharatiya Jnänapitha Mürtidevi Jaina Granthamälä, Sanskrit (Series)
No. 13, 1955I, 197l2.
3. Tattvärthädhigamasütra-Tikä of Siddhasena ganin (together with the Kärikä-
Tikä of Devagupta). Devacandra Lälabhäi Pustakoddhära Fund No. 67,
Bombay 1926.
4. Dupadupikä-Tikä by Haribhadra and other authors. Published by P$abha-
devaji Kesarlmalaji Jaina Svetämbara Samsthä, Ratalam 1936.
5. Räjavärtika or Tattvärthavärtika of Akalanka. Ed. by M. Jain , Banaras.
Bhäratiya Jnänapitha Mürtidevi Jaina Granthamälä, Skt. No. 10, 1953
(Vol. 1); Skt. No. 20, 1957 (Vol. 2).
6. Tattvärthasära of Amrtacandra. Sri Digambara Jaina Grantha Bhandara
Käsi, Prathama Gucchaka, edited by Pannäläla Chaudhar" , 1925, pp.
103-164.
7. H.D. Velankar , Jinaratnakosa, Poona 1944, pp. 153^-157^.
8. C. Tripathi , Catalogue of the Jaina Manuscripts at Strasbourg, Indol.
Berol. 4, Leiden 1975, Ser. Nos. 103-11.
STUDIES IN THE WOODEN ART OBJECTS OF THE
BERLIN TURFAN COLLECTION
By Chhaya Bhattacharya, New Delhi
Aim :
The aim of this paper is to give a general background of the study of the
wooden art objects of the Berlin Turfan Collection - a collection which is
the result of four consecutive expeditions to Chinese Turkistan led by renowned
German archaeologists, viz. Prof. A. Grünwedel and Dr. A. von Le Coq,
between 1902 and 1914.
The Collection:
The Berlin Turfan Collection is one of the most important Central Asian
art collections in the world. The Collection is popularly known as Turfan
Collection because the first German archaeological expedition, under Prof.
A. Grünwedel and Dr. Huth, was led to Turfan, an oasis situated in the eastern
part of the Northern Silk Road. Other places from which objects of the Collect¬
ion were brought are Tumsuk, Kizil, Kumtura, SorSuk, Khocho, Murtuk, Sängim,
and Toyok. They are all situated on the Northern Silk Road. The CoUection com¬
prises mainly wall-paintings. Besides, it is enriched with sculptures made of
stucco, wood and metal, and also with manuscripts, terracottas, and paintings
on textile. The Collection is housed in the Museum of Indian Art, Berlin.
Scope of the work:
Very little research work has been done on Central Asian art all over the
world. First-hand information about the Berlin Turfan Collection can be found
in the seven enormous volumes written by Le Coq and Waldschmidt (l). Ad¬
ditionally, Le Coq and Grünwedel have written books on the findings from
Khocho (2) and Kucha (3), respectively. In these volumes, more emphasis
was laid on wall-paintings than on other art objects. Later on, most of the
research work done on Central Asian art included wall-paintings and manus¬
cripts. Up to now, art-historians have exclusively worked on wall-paintings
and only occasionally made side references to motifs, depicted on other
objects including sculptures. Now, for the first time, the wooden objects
of the Turfan Collection have been described minutely. While describing each
object in great detail , an attempt has also been made to compare particular
elements, wherever possible, with the elements found on objects other than
wood, i.e., stucco-sculptures, wall-paintings, paintings on textile. The
result is under publication.
The thesis:
The exact title of my thesis is "Studies in the wooden objects of the Berlin
Central Asian Art Collection", and consists of four sections. Section One is
