A Probable Jain Source for a Verse in Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha, Chapter I

Summary

The article 'A Probable Jain Source for a Verse in Sarva‑darsana‑samgraha, Chapter I' by Ramkrishna Bhattacharya investigates the provenance of a particular verse in the well‑known philosophical compendium Sarva‑darsana‑samgraha (SDS). The SDS, compiled in the fourteenth century by the Advaita scholar Madhava Vidyaranya, surveys and critiques a dozen schools of Indian thought, including Lokayata (Carvaka), Buddhist, Jain and Hindu systems. Bhattacharya notes that a verse in the opening chapter, traditionally understood to summarise a Carvaka argument against performing funerary offerings (sraddha), may actually be derived from Jain sources. The author begins by quoting the verse and tracing its textual history through successive editions of SDS—from Iswarachandra Vidyasagara’s 1851 edition, through Hari Narayan Apte’s 1906 reprint, to Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar’s 1924 critical edition. Each edition contains slight variations in wording, and Abhyankar adds two additional lines that change the focus of the passage. Bhattacharya consults Sanskrit dictionaries such as Sabdakalpadruma and Vacaspatyam and examines commentaries and quotations in later works to compare readings. The article then explores possible Jain parallels. Bhattacharya reviews Jain texts that criticise the efficacy of sraddha, including canonical works and commentaries by authors like Umasvati and later Tattvartha‑sutra expositors. He notes that Jain philosophers often argued, on ethical and metaphysical grounds, against the idea that food offerings could benefit deceased souls. The paper surveys Jain scholastic writings that use similar analogies to question ritual offerings, such as comparing the feeding of travellers with the feeding of the dead. Bhattacharya also considers the influence of Prakrit moral poems and popular aphorisms that circulated across sectarian boundaries. Through philological comparison, he suggests that the contested verse might have been adapted from a Jain critique of sraddha which entered the Carvaka tradition and was then cited in SDS. He acknowledges, however, that definitive proof is elusive, since many verses circulated anonymously and were shared among different schools. By carefully analysing manuscripts, commentaries and cross‑references, Bhattacharya not only raises questions about the verse’s origin but also illustrates the complexity of textual transmission and the porous boundaries between Jain and non‑Jain intellectual traditions in medieval India.