Kartikeyanupreksha

SR No.: 090248
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Kumar Swami
Publisher: Paramshrut Prabhavak Mandal
Total Pages: 589
Language: Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Religion
File Size: 19 MB

Page 58

INTBODUOFION
4) KATTIGEYANUPPEKKHA
a) Its GENUINE TITLE
Though the work is known at present by the title Suami-Kartlikeynuprekaz, it is necessary to investigate what might have been the original title of the Prākrit text dealing with twelve Anupreksäs. In the opening gāthā the author says voccham anupehão and in the last but one gātha birana anitvekkhdo bhaniya. From these references it appears that the author possibly bad in view a title like Barasa-anuvelekha. Some time there must have been folt the need of distinguishing this work from that of Kundakunda which also deals with these very topics in Prikrit. Obviously, therefore, the us. Ba gives the concluding title Sudimi - Kunuiranuprekşti mentioning the author's name. This wa, being earlier than Subhacandra, its title is not without some sign i a 2* ixcó tl:it specifies Kumāra and pot Kārttikeya. Subhacundra, the Sanskrit commentator, calls this work by the name Kürttikeycinuprekęă (in the opening verse and also Sedimi-Ka, long with the honorifiy Sri Bee the colophons at the close of various sections). Jayacandra follows Subbacandra in his Hindi Vacanika and adopts the same title as is used by the latter. The available evidence this shows that the original name was possibly Barasa-Anuvekkhā; it was later called Svīmi-Kumarnupreksd; and then it is Subhacandra who should be held inainly responsible for the presentday title of the text, namely, Surimi - Känttikeyānuprexści.
b) FORMAL DESCRIPTION
It is Subhacandra, the Sanskrit commentator, who is responsible for the standardised text of this work; und scoording to him there are in all 491 gāthās, of which one gathā is presented twice (Nos. 222 & 280), but he does not seem to have taken any note of it. The my. La omita gåtha No. 65 and the ma, Ba, gāthā No. 229 : these may be cases of copyists missing the verges. After găthi No. 65, Mss. Ba and Ma add some three grāthīs; their contents, as seen from the Bhagavati - Arūdhani, 1800, are undoubtedly old; but their versions being defective and linguistic features uncertain, they could not be incorporated in our text following the lead of Subhandra who does not accept them in the body of the text, though he shows his acquaintance with them in his commentary. Two extra gāthās, Nos. 251 1 and 384*1 deserve our attegtion. The first is accepted by Subhacandra as a pathuāntara and
1) This name being quite current has been retained ic this edition and used in this Intro. with or without Svāmi both in its Prakrit and Sanskrit forms,