The Bauddha-Santana Dvatrimsika of Siddhasena Divakara

Summary

In this paper M.A. Dhaky analyses a small but significant Jaina work, the Bauddha‑Santāna‑Dvātṛṃśikā attributed to Siddhasena Divākara, a seventh‑century Digambara scholar known for his dialectical treatises. The Bauddha‑Santāna‑Dvātṛṃśikā is a thirty‑two‑verse critique of Buddhist thought preserved in later Jaina commentaries. Dhaky argues that the work forms part of a wider Nirgrantha tradition of engaging with rival philosophical systems by paraphrasing, refuting and occasionally assimilating their doctrines. He situates the text within a period of intense interaction between Jaina and Buddhist thinkers, when the two communities competed for patronage and intellectual influence across western and central India. Drawing on surviving verses quoted in the works of Akalaṅka, Vidyānanda and other Jaina commentators, Dhaky reconstructs Siddhasena’s argumentative strategy. The author identifies the Buddhist school being critiqued as Madhyamaka and Yogācāra and shows how Siddhasena adapts Nāgārjuna’s terminology to highlight what he sees as inconsistencies in Buddhist cosmology and logic. At the same time, the Jaina author acknowledges Buddhist insights into dependent origination and impermanence and uses them to clarify his own doctrine of anekāntavāda (the multiplicity of viewpoints). Dhaky’s close reading demonstrates that Siddhasena employed both refutation and appropriation to establish Jaina doctrines as superior yet compatible with certain Buddhist insights. The article also surveys how later Jaina authors such as Prabhācandra and Hemacandra cite the Bauddha‑Santāna‑Dvātṛṃśikā to buttress their polemics. Dhaky examines variations in the verse readings and traces how the text was preserved in commentaries while the original treatise was lost. He notes that the Bauddha‑Santāna‑Dvātṛṃśikā was sometimes confused with Siddhasena’s other work, the Sanmatitarka, and emphasises the need for critical editing. By comparing Jaina critiques with parallel Buddhist responses preserved in doxographical works like Bhāvacandra’s Syādvāda‑Ratnākara, the author reconstructs an intellectual dialogue spanning centuries. He concludes that the Bauddha‑Santāna‑Dvātṛṃśikā provides valuable evidence for the historical development of Indian logic and the cross‑fertilisation of Buddhist and Jaina ideas. Dhaky’s study not only reconstructs a neglected text but also situates it within the broader context of interreligious debate in classical India. He shows that Jaina engagement with Buddhist philosophy was sophisticated, combining respect for Buddhist intellectual achievements with a firm defence of Jaina metaphysics. The paper thus contributes to a deeper understanding of how South Asian philosophical traditions interacted and how these interactions shaped the evolution of Jaina thought.