Lilavai

SR No.: 002796
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1966
Total Pages: 500
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 15 MB

Page 33

6
LİLAVAİ
than J; and moreover it shows some partiality for the rules of Hemacandra's Prakrit grammar. It is accompanied marginal glosses which are at times very helpful. The author of this gloss appears to be aware of the variant readings of J: at least one such case is preserved (gatha No. 669, reading 23). The MS. B is neither so old nor have its readings reached the hands of the editor in a very correct form; but its special value lies in the fact that it is accompanied by the Sanskrit commentary.
These three MSS. easily fall into two groups: J and P stand closely together, though P is not an immediate copy of J, while B stands much apart. Syllabic variants arising out of optional rules of grammar, uncertainty of pronunciation and similitude of orthographic symbols are not in any way safe criteria in grouping the MSS. This is all the more true in Prakrit texts. The MS. B stands separate and by itself for the following reasons : It possesses some ten verses which are not found in the other MSS. (see Nos. 51, 62*1, 1061-2, 271*1, 933*1, 1308*1, 13191, and 1320 1-2). Its conclusion fundamentally differs from that found in PJ (see gäthās 1317 ff). Even though some of its readings. agree now with P and then with J, it shows uniform tendency of substituting i and u for e and o followed by conjuncts. Often it does not admit ya-sruti after vowels other than a or a. Its writing of n or n is. uncertain. Sometimes its readings, lines and portions of lines (see the readings on gathās 17, 20, 36, 40, 83, 93, 95, 131, 144, 292, 345, 412, 496, 807, 819, 850, 970, 983, 1031, 1114, 1216, 1268, 1294, 1298, 1311, 1314 etc.) are materially different from those agreed upon by P and J. Some of the readings of vowel-variations are perhaps due to copyists who read the gatha with faulty pauses and wrong intonation and then corrected some syllables hypercritically. The exact and relative authenticity of the readings of B cannot be fairly judged until some more MSS. containing this text and commentary come to light.
Though P and J form a group against B, they too have somedifferences among them. It is true that they have some 21 common verses not admitted by B (see Nos. 227, 982, 1091, 1141, 1167, 1317-19 and 132133); but each one has some gāthās special to itself (in J: 161, 74.1 and 585 1-3; in P 136 1, 635 1-4, 6541, 662 1, 716 1 and 13331). It may also be mentioned that P and B have two gāthās special to themselves (Nos. 272 and 1234). The readings of J often correct the scribal lapses of P and fill its lacunae. In admitting the bindu (-) or anunāsika J and P agree against B which is very indifferent about it (as judged from the transcript).