Bhaktamara Darshan

SR No.: 002588
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Rajyashsuri
Publisher: Jain Dharm Fund Pedhi Bharuch
Publication Year: 1997
Total Pages: 436
Language: Sanskrit, English, Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 50 MB

Page 403

Sri Gunakara Suri in his commentary draws our attention to the fact of difference between the substantive mani and adjective 'sphuran'. Another commentator took the two words to be different and interpreted 'tejah' to mean the greatness of the best and natural gem. But Sri Meghavijayji has this reading -- 'tejomani samupayati yatha mahattvam naivam tatha kacasakalesu rucakaresu'.
It appears from these that even if small changes are introduced in the original either at the level of sounds or sense it will be chaos and there won't be any limit for changes. There is a rule in Sanskrit -- 'sthitasya gathih cintaniya' (one should try to explain the existing readings and forms than to emend or change). So whatever reading available we must try to explain them or try to analyse them grammatically. No attempt should be made to change it without sufficient evidence.
Variant - 5 – Sloka - 40 Accepted reading: Davanalam jvalitam ujjvalam utsphulingam Variant:
Davanalam jvalitam ujjvalam utphulingam The variant is given by many editions. It seems Sri Siddhacandra Upadhyaya had this reading only before him. It could have come to him from some early manuscript. Hence he offers the following comment, "The word begins with 's' only, and the reading 'phulinga' appears to be an error. But even then, the reading phulinga must be taken to be authoritative, for, it has been used by the great poet. We cannot comment on the lack of grammatical verifiability of usages in the works of Mantrasastra, for the rules governing the usages there, are entirely different and words cannot be deemed as erroneous on that count alone. Some manuscripts contain the reading 'sphulingam', and in such cases neither a doubt need be raised nor answered".
He seems to feel that though the word 'phulinga'is ungrammatical, yet since the word is found in Cintamani mantra, the author could have consciously made use of it, and one cannot make judgment over it. The controversy raised by Sri Siddhasena Gani seems to be unnecessary. All the three earlier commentaries have the reading 'sphulingam' The subscribers of 'phulingam' have only to think over a little and change their (wrong) habits.
We stop with this for the present the analysis of reading differences.
2
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<Rahasya Darshan 355)