Chronological Development of Jain Canonical Commentary Literature

Summary

The article “Chronological Development of Jain Canonical Commentary Literature” by Vandana Mehta reviews the evolution of commentaries on Jain canonical texts. Mehta notes that canonical commentaries are essential for understanding Jain scriptures yet researchers lacked a systematic chronology, so she attempts to provide onehttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=CHRONOLOGICAL%20DEVELOPMENT%20OF%20JAIN%20CANONICAL,some%20help%20to%20some%20scholars. After referring to S. R. Banerjee’s earlier survey of Jain literature, she focuses specifically on commentaries and divides them into five categories: Niryukti, Bhāṣya, Cūrṇi, Sanskrit Ṭīkā and commentaries in folk or regional languageshttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=It%20has%20been%20the%20tradition,is%20regarded%20as%20Niryuktik%C4%81ra. Niryuktis, composed in verse during the 5th–6th centuries CE, are the earliest commentaries; Bhāṣyas are verse commentaries that clarify the meaning of the Niryuktis and the basic canonical texts and include works by Jinabhadragaṇi and Saṃghadāsagaṇihttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=2.Bh%C4%81sya,As%20it%20has%20been%20mentioned. Cūrṇis are prose commentaries mixing Prakrit and Sanskrit and are associated with Jinadāsagaṇi Mahattarahttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=3.%20C%C5%ABr%C5%86i,7th%20cent.%20A.D. The Sanskrit Ṭīkās are more philosophical and include forms such as Vṛtti, Vivaraṇa and Vyākhyā; they develop from the eighth century onwards and are written on both the canon and on earlier commentarieshttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=4.%20Samskrta%20%C8%9A%C4%ABk%C4%81,Tippa%C5%86aka%2C%20Tippa%C3%B1a%2C%20Paty%C4%81ya%2C%20Stabaka%2C%20P%C4%AB%C8%9Bhik%C4%81. The last category comprises commentaries in regional languages like Rajasthani and Gujarati, written to aid local readershttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=5,D. Mehta states that she consulted historical sources such as Kapadia’s “History of the Canonical Literature of the Jainas” and works by Mohanlal Mehta and Jagdish Chandra Jainhttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=The%20books%20which%20I%20have,2005%29%2C%20are%20also%20consulted to establish approximate dates; she acknowledges that dating is difficult and encourages scholars to revise her timeline as research progresseshttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=On%20the%20basis%20of%20above,Both%20the. The remainder of the article presents a century‑by‑century list of commentators across Śvetāmbara and Digambara traditions, beginning with Ācārya Bhadrabāhu in the 5th century and moving through important figures such as Jinabhadragaṇi, Saṃghadāsagaṇi, Virasena, Jinasena and Haribhadrahttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=%C5%9Ayetambara%20and%20Digambara%20%C5%9Ea%E1%B9%ADkha%E1%B9%87%E1%B8%8D%C4%81gama%20and,C%C5%ABrni%20T%20Samsk%E1%B9%9Bta%20commentary. By summarizing the successive layers of commentary—from Niryuktis and Bhāṣyas through Cūrṇis, Sanskrit Ṭīkās and regional works—Mehta shows how Jain scholars continuously reinterpreted the canon to make it accessible to different audiences and to integrate philosophical developments. She argues that understanding the chronology of commentaries illuminates the intellectual history of Jainism, highlights the contribution of lesser‑known commentators and provides a foundation for further studyhttps://jainqq.org/booktext/Jain_Journal_2008_07_No_01/520271#:~:text=CHRONOLOGICAL%20DEVELOPMENT%20OF%20JAIN%20CANONICAL,some%20help%20to%20some%20scholars.