________________
... [ 466)....
in the fo edition is not consistent with the abovementioned similar readings found in its vicinity. The Ho, fato and yo editions follow theo edition in accepting these corrupt readings.
37. In sūtra 1215 [3] we have accepted the reading 'durūhitta rukkham durūhati' (p. 291). And it is yielded by all the manuscripts which we have utilised. It is missing in the go and the Ho editions. The 40, To and yo editions follow the ao edition in this matter. But the 370 edition contains the reading under consideration.
38. We have accepted the reading 'thitie siya hine' (p. 138, line 12). All the manuscripts yield it. The 8o and the 370 editions also contain it. But the #o edition contains in its place the reading 'thitle titthanavadie siya hine'. The Ho, FTO and To editions following the ao edition contain this reading. The additional word titthāņavadie is not found in the manuscripts.
39. In sūtra 2119[3] we have accepted the reading manūsesu'. The to, Ho and fo manuscripts yield the reading manussanam'. At this place we find faint indication in the commentary because elsewhere it has already exptained the subject-matter of the concerned portion of the text proper. If one were to examine sūtras preceding and succeeding the present one, one will find the reading manūsesu' correct and fitting in the context.
40. The portion beginning with 'vi' (sūtra 1050[3]; p. 258, line 1) and ending with 'savvatthasiddhadevatte' (sūtra 1052) is found in all the manuscripts we have consulted. Even the , 37. and FT editions contain it. But it is missing in the Ho edition. The Ho and the editions following the go edition do not contain it.
41. In sūtra 1202 we have accepted the reading teulessa' (p. 288, line 2). All the manuscripts yield it. But the ho edition contains in its place the reading 'lessä' which is meaningless in the context. The Ho and the go editions follow the ao edition in this matter. Again, in sūtra 1203[3] we have accepted the reading 'teulesse pudhavikkäie' (p. 288, line 10). And all the manuscripts yield it. But it is missing in the Ho edition. And even the Ho and the g editions which follow the eo edition do not contain it. The 970, B7o and to editions contain at both these places readings which we have accepted.
42. In sūtra 1307 we have accepted the reading jāva brädaravāukkāie vi' (p. 308). All the manuscripts yield it. Even to and 37° editions contain it. But the yo edition has in its place the reading jäva bådarateukāie vi bådaravāukāie vil'. This reading
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
