Sthaviravalicarita of Hemacandra by Hermann Jacobi
Summary
- This article (adapted from H. Jacobi’s 1932 introduction) explains what Hemacandra’s Sthavirāvalīcarita is and tests its historical basis. It is a legendary, chronologically arranged history of the Jain patriarchs from Jambu to Vajrasena. - Sources and dating. The narrative draws on the Jain Kathanaka tradition in four layers—Sūtras, Niryuktis, Cūrṇis, and Ṭīkās—developed roughly from the 1st c. CE (Niryuktis) to the 8th c. CE (Haribhadra’s Ṭīkā). Hemacandra chiefly uses Haribhadra’s Ṭīkā on the Āvaśyaka (and to a lesser degree on the Daśavaikālika) and also the Prakrit Vasudevahindī, which is not later than the 6th c. CE. - A table (reproducing Leumann) shows that the work’s substance is almost entirely derived from older sources. - Earlier, Bhadreśvara compiled many of these materials (Kathāvalī), but Hemacandra’s connected kāvya-style history superseded it. - Independent testimony: the Therāvalīs. Two teacher-lists corroborate succession: (i) the Nandī/Āvaśyaka Sūtras (Mahāgiri line) and (ii) the Kalpa-sūtra Sthavirāvalī (Suhastin line). They agree from the 5th patriarch Yaśobhadra through the 13th patriarch Vajra (Vayra) and his disciple Vajrasena. The Kalpa-sūtra preserves a short and a detailed redaction; the latter also lists each patriarch’s disciples plus the gaṇas, śākhās, and kulas they founded. - Epigraphic control. G. Bühler matched names of 4 gaṇas, 8 śākhās, and 13 kulas in Mathurā (Kankali-mound) inscriptions with the Sthavirāvalī, concluding that this part gives an on-the-whole trustworthy account of Śvetāmbara development (as expected in a late redaction of an oral tradition). Still, no inscription names a patriarch; beyond the epigraphically supported details, the succession rests on tradition. - Chronology via schisms (nihnavas). Records in the Āvaśyaka Niryukti and later ṭīkās give fixed points: e.g., 4th schism (Asamitta, 229 A.V.), 5th (Ganga, 228 A.V.), and 6th (Rohagutta), with the 7th at 584 A.V.; the Niryukti was written between 584–609 A.V. These data expose inconsistencies in the transmitted list: actors linked to Mahāgiri and Suhastin should be near-contemporaries, yet the 4th/5th and 6th schisms are placed ~three centuries apart. Using Bhadrabahu’s death (170 A.V.) and Vajra’s (provisionally 575 A.V.) as anchors yields unrealistic average patriarchate lengths; a more plausible mean (~28–30 years) implies the Therāvalī list is incomplete. For the 6th schism’s pedigree, Jacobi prefers the Niryukti over the Therāvalī (which likely used a faulty Vīra-era), explaining the dating errors. - Additional note. Hemacandra’s Pramāṇamīmāṃsā was planned in five adhyāyas (modeled on the Nyāya-sūtra), but only a fragment survives—about 100 sūtras with commentary, up to the end of the first āhnika of the second adhyāya.
AI-generated summary, automatically checked against the article text.
Conclusion
Hemacandra’s Sthavirāvalīcarita is a connected kāvya compiled almost entirely from earlier Kathanaka layers—Sūtras, Niryuktis, Cūrṇis, and Ṭīkās—especially Haribhadra’s Āvaśyaka ṭīkā and the Prakrit Vasudevahindī, rather than an independent chronicle. Independent Therāvalī lists concur from Yaśobhadra to Vayra/Vajrasena, and Mathurā inscriptions corroborate several gaṇas, śākhās, and kulas, but no inscription names a patriarch. Cross-checks with recorded schisms expose major chronological contradictions (implying omissions and a corrupted Vīra-era in part of the tradition), so the succession and dates cannot be used uncritically even though much institutional memory is reliable. A brief note adds that Hemacandra’s Pramāṇamīmāṁsā survives only as a fragment—up to the end of the first āhnika of the second adhyāya.