Agam 15 Upang 04 Pragnapana Sutra Part 02

Author(s): Shyamacharya, Punyavijay, Dalsukh Malvania, Amrutlal Bhojak
Publisher: Mahavir Jain Vidyalay

Page 485

...[456] ...
13. The reading sarirangovamganāme' (sū. 1693 and sů. 169454] (p. 369, lines 4th and 21st) and also the reading "°sarira govaṁgaņāme' (sū. 1694[4]) (p. 369, lines 22-23) are yielded by no manuscript of the text proper. Theo and the 37 editions contain the readings similar to the ones accepted by us. Even the commentary follows these readings. Let us quote the concerned portion of the commentary : 3śarträngopanganāmeti śarīrasyāngāny aştau śiraḥprabhļtīni, uktam ca-sisamuroyarapițsht do bahi uruya ya atthamga' iti, upangāni ca angāvayavabhūtāny angulyadini, śeşani tatpratyavayavabhūtāny anguliparvarekhădini angopangāni, syādávasankhyeye' ity ekaśeşaḥ, tannimittam nāma 4śarirangopānganāma (commentary, folio 469 B). The Ho edition accepts the corrupt reading 'sartrovamganāme' in place of 'sarīramgovamganāme.' The 27, to and go editions follow the 80 edition in this matter. Similarly, the # edition contains the wrong reading "*°sar[rovamganāmãe' in place of "sarirangovamganāmãe' (1702[14]). At this place also the Ho, Foto and yo editions follow the Ho edition. The concerned reading of sū. 1702[14] is missing in the go and the 370 editions.
14. The reading jah, kiriyāsu pāņāivayaviratassa' (sū. 1784 [31) printed on p. 390 (line 23) of the present edition is yielded by all the manuscripts we have consulted. The original version of the concerned text asks us to know all the alternatives from the sū. 1643 occurring in the chapter XXII called 'Kriyāpada'. This is the reason why we have accepted above-mentioned reading in the text proper at this place. Even so and the 370 editions contain this original reading. But the Go edition does not accept this reading. And Ho, fro and 5° editions follow the Fo edition in this matter. We are confident that there is no manuscript that does not contain this reading.
15. In sūtra 1786 all the manuscripts yield the reading 'bandhe' (p. 390) which refers to the chapter XXV called 'Bandhapada'. The so and the 370 editions also contain this reading. The commentator reproduces this entire sūtra (1786) in his commentary. Therein also we find the reading 'bandhe' (See commentary, folio 497 A). In the absence of this word 'bandhe' it becomes impossible for the reader to know as to which is the subject-matter of the sūtra 1786. In the printed text of the commentary the term 'bandhe' has been put in angular brackets [ ]. We do not understand as to why
3-4. At these two places the printed text of the commentary contains the
readings 'sarīropānganāmeti' and 'sariropānganāma' respectively. The reading we have given above is yielded by many old manuscripts of the commentary.