Mahavira Charitam

SR No.: 010406
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Todarmal Pandit
Publisher: University of Panjab Lahore
Publication Year: 1928
Total Pages: 407
Language: Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 34 MB

Page 332

274
NOTES
O10
the seed of Mitra and Varuna had fallen See Rum VII. 57. Cf. halasa-janman in Arai VII. 16, 89. Lopamudra is his wife
Page 197, 1. 2. ayan zūrām, &c., refers to the fable according to which Agastya is said to have drunk up the ocean, because it had offended him and because he wished to help Indra and the gods in their wars with the demons called Kaleyas who had hidden themselves in the waters and oppressed the worlds See Muhu I. 104, 105 Cf Anar. VII 16, 89; 95, Būl. I. 28; VII. 19; 20, IX. 36, Bahinutulu VI 88 (No 414)
1. 3. ayam undhyo, ác, refers to the second fable in accordance with which he is said to have humbled, at the request of the gods, the Vindhya mountain which, through jealousy of mount Meru, began to rise higher and higher, so as to olostruct the path of the sun and moon. See Mahū. I 104 Cf Anar. VII. 16, 89, Bul. I. 28.
1.4 milye, &c., 1 efers to the thud fable of his devouring the demon Vatapı who, with his boother Ilvala, oppi essed the worlds See Rām. III. 11, Mahā. III. 99 Cf. But I. 28, II. 51
1 8. úhasc Foz the definition see Daśur I 60. 1. 13 Prandau See Pün III.2, 173 1 15. bulut, &c. Of Utt. II 27-28 Page 198, 1. 1 zunenulihena, &c. Cf p 147, 1 1 above 12 som, &c Cl. ibid
1. 3 suumitrih, &c. The line contradicts p 139, 1. 5, where Rama and not Lukemana casts aside the skeleton of Dundubhi and not of Kabandha I am inclined to take this contradiction as an argument in favour of the conjecture that the two passages do not belong to the same author.
1. 4. dretam, &c. Cf. p 133, 1 3 above 1. 6 Sanskrit chāyā hem nāma mamottarīyam āryaputrena 11 6-7. kanumato haste da stam 1. 11 Verse 17. Cf Utt III 11, Mal IX 22. 1. 3. sundrumrtuo. Of. Mal I. 22. Page 199, 1 5. yasah-suriram. Iepeated in Anar. I. 6/7.
1. 6. Sanskrit chuyu : katham mana hārunāt tādrśayor api mahānubhāvayor ūdrso'rasthu vese80 nisamyate.
1. 11. Sanskrit chāya: aho katham punar apr ta eva ruhsasūh śrüyante Page 200, 1. 2. salya Cf. Ragh. IV. 53. I. 3. áryūrartuh. For the boundaries of this region see Manu, II. 22
1. 5. uttama-puruario refers to the Dwarf incarnation of Visņu Cf. Sak. VII. 6; Viks amorrasi I. 19.
1. 18. Sanskrit chaya: aho hutham dine pr tarahü cahram ivartad drśyate. Page 201, 1. 2. savimüna". The commentators read sa vimānā°.
apastah: the sentence is faulty because of the absence of the subject As I understand it, we must supply atz-viprakarsah hinted at by atı-viprakar sät occurring just before. Jv., however, disagrees and supplies rauk instead. Cf. a similar case, p. 189, 1. 8.