SearchBrowseAboutContactDonate
Page Preview
Page 24
Loading...
Download File
Download File
Translation AI Generated
Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
".. . . The second verse demands it. If the first verse is removed from the text, the word 'api' becomes very jarring. Therefore, the said verse is not a *kshepak* and there is no apparent opposition between it and the next verse. To label it an *anabhijnakshepak* is to reveal one's own ignorance. It seems that Bakliwalji's attention did not go to this 'api' word and this is why he did not translate it. Also, the meaning of that *anabhijnakshepak* did not appear clear to him. This is why he unnecessarily imagined the words "and" and "only" in it and had to write that the *anvaya* of this verse is not correct. Otherwise, the *anvaya* of this verse is not difficult at all - by placing 'samayikam baniyat' at the end of the verse, the *anvaya* becomes easy. The *anvaya* and subject matter connection of the other verses are also mostly in the same state. It seems that he did not understand them properly at that time and therefore all his mention of them seems to be filled with mistakes. Recently, upon our inquiry, Bakliwalji, in his letter dated June 18, 1923, has also acknowledged this mistake, which we present below in his own words: "In the first edition of Ratnakaranḍa, there is no evidence for the five verses that I had declared as *kshepak*. At that time, due to my own shallow intellect, such an assumption was made. After seeing the logical commentary in the Sanskrit commentary, my mind is no longer inclined to believe that they are *kshepak*. It was my very first work, the Sanskrit commentary was not available, so question marks (?) were noted for consideration. So it was my mistake." Although this was Bakliwalji's mistake at that time, it has led many people into the circle of error, one example of which is Pandit Nana Ramchandraji Nag. You did not doubt that the said 21 verses were *kshepak* from Bakliwalji's said work, but you have completely rejected 15+ verses from them. Out of the said 21 verses, the remaining ones, except for the following six verses, are - *madyamamsa*, *yadnishtan*, *nishreyasa*, *janmajara*, *vidyadarshan*, *kale kalpa*. For Personal & Private Use Only
Page Text
________________ '.. . . दूसरे विधानको माँगता है। यदि पहला पद्य ग्रंथसे निकाल दिया जाय तो यह ' अपि' शब्द बहुत कुछ खटकने लगता है। अतः उक्त पद्य क्षेपक नहीं है और न अगले पद्य के साथ उसका कोई विरोध जान पड़ता है। उसे अनभिज्ञक्षेपक ' बतलाना अपनी ही अनभिज्ञता प्रकट करना है। मालूम होता है कि बाकलीवालजीका ध्यान इस ' अपि ' शब्द पर नहीं गया और इसीसे उन्होंने इसका अनुवाद भी नहीं दिया। साथ ही, उस अनभिज्ञक्षेपकका अर्थ भी उन्हें ठीक प्रतिभासित नहीं हुआ। यही वजह है कि उन्होंने उसमें व्यर्थ ही केवल" और 'ही'शब्दोंकी कल्पना की और उन्हें क्षेपकत्वके हेतु स्वरूप यह भी लिखनाः पड़ा कि इस पद्यका अन्वय ही ठीक नहीं बैठता । अन्यथा इस पद्यका अन्वय कुछ भी कठिन नहीं है-'सामयिकं बनीयात्'को पद्यके अन्त में कर देनेसे सहज ही अन्वय हो जाता है। दूसरे पद्योंके अन्वयार्थ तथा विषयसम्बंधकी भी प्रायः ऐसी ही हालत है । उन्हें भी आपने उस वक्त ठीक तौरसे समझा मालूम नहीं होता और इस लिये उनका वह सब उल्लेख प्रायः भूलसे भरा हुआ जान' पड़ता है । हालमें, हमारे दर्याफ्त करने पर, बालकीवालजीने, अपने १८ जून सन् १९२३ के पत्र में, इस भूलको स्वीकार भी किया है, जिसे हम उन्हींके शब्दोंमें नीचे प्रकट करते हैं "रत्नकरंडके प्रथम संस्करणमें जिन पचोंको मैंने क्षेपक ठहराया था उसमें कोई प्रमाण नहीं उस वक्तकी अपनी तुच्छ बुद्धिसे ही ऐसा अनुमान हो गया था । संस्कृतटीकामें सबकी युक्तियुक्त टीका देखनेसे मेरा मन अब नहीं है कि वे क्षेपक हैं । वह प्रथम ही प्रथम मेरा काम था संस्कृत टीका देखने में आई नहीं थी इसीलिये विचारार्थ प्रश्नात्मक (?) नोट कर दिये गये थे । सो मेरी भूल थी।" यद्यपि यह बाकलीवालजीकी उस वक्तकी भूल थी परंतु इसने कितने ही लोगों को भूलके चक्कर में डाला है, जिसका एक उदाहरण पं० नाना रामचंद्रजी नाग हैं । आपने बाकलीवालजीकी उक्त कृति परसे उन्हीं २१ पद्योंपर:क्षेपक होनेका संदेह किया हो सो नहीं, बल्कि उनमेंसे पंद्रह + पद्योंको बिलकुल ही __ + उक्त २१ पद्योंमेंसे निम्नलिखित छह पद्योंको छोड़कर जो शेष रहते हैं उनको- मद्यमांस, यदनिष्टं, निःश्रेयस, जन्मजरा, विद्यादर्शन, काले कल्प। Jain Education International For Personal & Private Use Only www.jainelibrary.org
SR No.010669
Book TitleRatnakarandaka Shravakachara
Original Sutra AuthorN/A
AuthorJugalkishor Mukhtar
PublisherManikchand Digambar Jain Granthamala Samiti
Publication Year1982
Total Pages456
LanguageHindi, Sanskrit
ClassificationBook_Devnagari
File Size7 MB
Copyright © Jain Education International. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy