Proceedings of the Seminar on Prakrit Studies 1973

SR No.: 014005
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K R Chandra, Dalsukh Malvania, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1978
Total Pages: 226
Language: English
Classification: Seminar & Articles
File Size: 13 MB

Page 168

127
festive and amorous mood. Abhisātikās also being affected by the light atmosphere, are passionately rushing towards their lovers,
The variant reading Fealaat of the Ms. Ka' in the place of the reading for fara preferred by the editor suits better in the above context and helps to remove the obscurity in understanding the passage. Here the Prakrit word 'F' (i. e. ft) is derived from the Sanskrit word 'fa' meaning "the sky'; We may take fattat for the Sanskrit word auto meaning ‘change or loss of colour'. At the close of a day, the sky loses its various colours and finally plunges into the ocean of darknegs. As per literary convention it is twilight or a little later an Abhisarika goes to meet her lover at a rendezvous. Hence 'fee-fact-a-ra-gia- Tea ' etc may be rendered as follws:
"...Jingling sound of the anklets of the charming Abhisărikas being overwhelmed by passion moving immediately as the sky lost its brilliance (i. e, as it became dark)."
In the above explanation, I have expressed, though faintly, my dissa. tisfaction with the printed chaya. There are, however, more instances where the chāyā needs to be corrected11. But just I pass over that part.
Now I take up yet another passage where I believe a proper reading of the text was necessary and where a problem of syntax is involved.
The passage under question is this:
"कदिवअ-गुणग्गहण-गव्व-वंचिदे विपंचिए, अगणिज्ज गुणं अमिअ-गुणाअं इमाए 3quartåt o fe å \” (CI. 11. 22 2)
In this passage, the phrase 'अगणिज्ज गुणं अमिअ गुणाअं इमाए' is apparently obscure In order to overcome this obscurity, Dr. Upadhye12 prefers a reading of (from the Ms. Ka) to form and makes fuJU (vocative) an epithet of fagfy. Prof. Patawardhan disapproves of this reading because, according to him, fue JU' would be a repetition of faget and he appears to be right. He, on his own part, amends to SAC and suggests that 37fa31 J037 should be altogether dropped. But I am afraid, he is taking too much liberty with the text in order to overcome the obscurity. In these circumstances, a third reading may be suggested as a possible alternative-"...377651 Jul 374
3 37 ATC...' (87777afta 11 37 T: 978: etc.). While construing this phrase, I treat stofur (Acc. pl.) (on the lines of Prof. Patawardhan) as an object of squad. True, this construction appears to contain a repetition of the same idea,