________________
... [ 436 )... MALAYAGIRI AND HIS COMMENTARY ON
PRAJNĀPANĀSŪTRA
We have edited merely the original text of Prajñāpanāsūtra. Hence it is not possible for us to give exhaustive details about the # commentary and its author. While editing the original text of Prajñāpanāsūtra we had to consult the commentary every now and then. It is to be borne in mind that none can prepare the critical and faithful edition of Prajñāpanāsūtra or any Agama without consulting commentaries thereon. Out of the critical editions of the original sūtras that have been published down to this day those that have been prepared with scant and cursory consultation of their respective commentaries or without the consultation of them contain at many places unauthentic readings.
While editing the original text of Prajñāpanā we got the opportunity to study the commentary. As a result of this study whatever information we gathered about the commentary and its authori is presented here. We firmly believe that old manuscripts of Sūtras and the commentaries on Sūtras constitute the solid bases depending on which one can prepare the authentic texts of Sūtras. We are harping on this point whenever the occasion arises. Even though commentaries constitute one of the solid means for preparing critical edition of Agamas, they lead the editor astray in selecting the authentic readings when they are consulted halfheartedly and cursorily. From this follows that the editor should independently ponder over as to whether the readings yielded by the commentary are in tune with those found in the manuscripts. In other words, he should see as to whether the readings yielded by the commentary are consistent with the line of thought presented in the text of original Sūtra. While editing the present work we have experienced that this sort of weighing is really necessary. In this edition of Prajñāpanāsūtra there are places where we have accepted readings found in old manuscripts having gone against the commentary because we have deemed them proper and consistent. But then there arises a question as to why the commentary contains unauthentic readings. The answer is as follows. The commentator seems not to have corrected the commentary after having written it. Or, if he would have corrected it, we are not at present in possession of the manuscripts representing the corrected version.
1. Here we are to understand Ac. Malayagiri and his commentary.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
