पाटीगणित (श्रीधराचार्य - प्राचीन संस्कृत टीका एवं प्रो. कृपाशंकर शुक्ल सविस्तार व्याख्या)

xxxvi INTRODUCTION
Hindu. N. C. Jaina regards the reading jinam as authentic
and so he suggests that the occurrence of the reading śivaṁ in
the printed edition of the Triśatikā is probably a deliberate
change made by the editor, Sudhâkara Dvivedî.
The above views of N. C. Jaina are unacceptible,
because
(i) All manuscripts of the Triśatikā, excepting the un-
usual one mentioned by N. C. Jaina, that are known
today, have the reading śivaṁ and not jinam.
(ii) The opening stanza of the Pāṭīgaṇita cannot be a
composition of a Jaina writer.
(iii) There occurs in the Pāṭīgaṇita an example relating
to the worship of the five faces of God Śiva, whereas
there is no example relating to any Jaina god either
in the Pāṭīgaṇita or in the Triśatikā.
(iv) The manuscript of the Triśatikā referred to by N. C.
Jaina bears the impress of some Jaina scholar, who
has made numerous alterations in the original text
and has added a large number of rules and exam-
ples (including one example relating to Jaina
gods), which are not found to occur in any other
manuscript of the Triśatikā known to us. The
reading jinam is thus evidently due to him.
5·2. His Time.
(1) Views of earlier scholars. Sudhâkara Dvivedî, who
was the first to deal with the life of Śrīdharâcârya, thinking
that Śrīdharâcârya, the author of the Triśatikā, was the same
person as the author of the philosophical work, the Nyâya-
kandalî, fixed his date at 991 A.D., this being the time of
composition of the latter work. In support of his conjecture,
he says :¹
"The ancients were not scholars of one science only.
There is little doubt that they were very learned and proficient

---

¹ See Sudhâkara Dvivedî, Gaṇaka-taraṅgiṇī, Banaras (1933), p. 24.