________________
418
W. B. BOLLEE
2, 6, 35
jivânubhāgam su-vicintayantā āhāriyā anna-vihīě sohim na viyāgare channa-paôvajīvī eso 'nudhammo iha samjayānam
a: C: jīvânubhāge; - b: C: odhārīyā; T: vihīya; J: sohi; - c: omnes: paopajīvili
THINKING OVER CAREFULLY THE CONSEQUENCES OF ACTS FOR THE LIVING BEINGS ONE SHOULD PRESERVE PURITY REGARDING THE USE OF FOOD. NO ONE SHOULD GIVE EXPLANATIONS (of the Doctrine) WHO MAKES USE OF UNCLEAR WORDS (?). THIS IS THE RIGHT PRACTICE FOR OUR RECLUSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR FAITH.
The Cūrni of 2, 6, 34f. has become mixed up it seems. Yet perhaps the canonical text had already been corrupted. Therefore I have dealt with the two stanzas together here and I have tried to get along without the additions Jacobi took from the tīkā which make the text look more intelligible than it actually is.
(2, 6, 34) (Ah): with this particle J fills the lacuna of one mora on the authority of the Cūrni reading tadh' which however, is not found in our C. Aho dainya-vismayâdisu. Dainyam tāvat jahā koyi kamci dimūdham (?) uppahena adantam datthum bhanati. Aho ayam evam varāo kilittho kilissati. Evam tubbhe ummagga-padivannā moham kilissaha. Sāsūyeti vismaye. Ayam sobhano aho siddhanto yatrâcintitam karma-cayam na gacchati (...). Aho -sabdaḥ sarvatrânuvarttate aho vacas tena gurunā kara-tala ivâmalakam sarva-loko 'valo-kitah - jnāta ity arthaḥ. (Cu 432, 14ff.) Jīvânubhāge: kaścâisām anubhāgas tanu-sukha-priyatāh duhkhôdvigitā, tat kim uktam bhavati? Evam jivânubhāgo suttio bhavati; yad uta sarvasattvānām ātmộpamānena na kimci duhkham udapaptad iti (Cū 433, 3f.), karma-vipāka (T II 150a 6). Puvvam (...) putthe: not commented upon in Cü. Bhavatām yasah pūra-samudram aparam ca spastam (sprstam ?),21 gatim ity arthah (T II 150a 6). Did Śílânka read puttham?
(2, 6, 35) Āhāriyā: m.c. for āhārīya, polyvalent indeclinable optative form (Pi § 466), Ţ II 150a 11 āhrtavantah.
