'भगवती आराधना' के रचनाकार आचार्य शिवकोटि
By शिवकोटि, आचार्य शिवकोटि, शिवकोटि मुनि, शिवकोटि आचार्य, शिवकोट्याचार्य, शिवार्य, शिवभूति
Summary
This PDF discusses the identity and historical context of Ācārya Śivakoṭi, a Jain monk. It begins with a verse from Ācārya Jinasena’s *Ādipurāṇa* (circa 770–850 CE) that remembers Śivakoṭi as the proponent of the fourfold path to liberation: right faith, right knowledge, right conduct, and right austerity. Another verse identifies Śivakoṭi as a disciple of Samantabhadra and the author of the *Tattvārthasūtra*. The text notes that some scholars, including Dr. A. N. Upadhye and Dr. V. K. Khadabadi, consider Śivakoṭi the author of the Prakrit *Ārādhanā* (also called *Bhagavatī Ārādhanā* or *Mūlārādhanā*), a work of 2,164 gāthās. However, the *Ārādhanā* itself states its author is Śivārya, who studied under Ārya Jinānandigaṇi, Ārya Sarvaguptagaṇi, and Ārya Mitranandigaṇi. The earliest available commentary on this text is the *Vijayodayā Ṭīkā* by Aparājita Sūri (circa 700 CE). Based on a description in the *Ārādhanā* of Ācārya Bhadrabāhu’s peaceful death despite severe pain, scholars suggest Śivārya was contemporary with Bhadrabāhu II (circa 37–14 BCE). The text distinguishes Śivakoṭi, the disciple of Samantabhadra, from Śivārya, the author of the *Ārādhanā*. Dr. Jyotiprasad Jain identifies Śivakoṭi as a royal disciple of Samant
AI-assisted summary, not yet checked. Consult the original PDF before citing.
Conclusion
This document establishes that the figure known as Shivakoti is not a single historical person but a name shared by multiple distinct Jain acharyas across different centuries. The primary implication is the need to disentangle these identities, particularly separating the author of the *Bhagavati Aradhana* (Shivarya) from the disciple of Samantabhadra (Shivakoti Suri) and the potential Kannada author of the *Vaddaradhane*. The outcome is a clarified historical timeline, suggesting that the *Aradhana* text dates from around the beginning of the Common Era, post-dating Bhadrabahu II but preceding Acharya Kundakunda. This analysis resolves scholarly confusion by attributing specific texts and lineages to their correct authors, thereby refining our understanding of early Digambara and Yapaniya traditions and their literary contributions.