Agam 15 Upang 04 Pragnapana Sutra Part 02

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

Page 502

...[473]...
any exception, contain sutras 898 and 899 which we have accepted in the body of the text proper (p. 221). Hence all the editions published so far, except the , contain them. But in the edition they have been dropped. Out of these two sūtras, sūtra 898 is identical with sūtra 870 word by word. Hence in the introductory remarks to the sutra 898 the commentator says, 'samprati prāguktam eva sūtraṁ sūtrāntarasambandhanärtham bhūyaḥ pathati'. This naturally proves originality and utility of sūtra 898. Considering the repetition of sūtra 870 as sūtra 898 to be improper the editor of Suttagame dropped sutra 898 without examining its propriety and utility.
65. It seems that several phrases occurring in sutra 1237 (pp. 296-297) have been intentionally dropped in the o edition. They are as follows: the word 'vara' which occurs twice in 15th line (p. 296), and once in 18th line (p. 296), the sutra-portion 'ăsalā māsalā pesalā īsioṭṭhāvalambini isim voccheyakaḍui isi tambacchikarant' occurring in lines 18-19 (p. 296), the sūtra-portion 'āsāyaṇijjā visāyaṇijjā piṇanijjā viṁhanijjā divanijja' occurring in 1st line (p. 297) and the 'savvimdiyapalhāyaṇijjā' occurring in 2nd line (p. 297). All these are found in the old manuscripts as also in all the editions except the . Thus it is quite obvious that these cases of omission are not the result of oversight (in proof-reading), nor are they the result of inadvertence. As a matter of fact, the editor of Suttagame has intentionally dropped these portions of sutra 1237.
'
66. The reading 'adda ya asî ya mani uḍupāne tella phāniya vasā ya' which we have accepted in gāthā 203 of sūtra 972 mentions seven dvaras. But the o edition mentions two dvaras 'duddha' and 'pāṇe' in place of one dvāra uḍupāne', thus making the total number of dvaras eight instead of seven. The reading mentioning eight dvaras is yielded by several manuscripts belonging to different groups. But the reading uḍupane' is yielded by very old manuscripts. And it is this reading that is authentic. Hence we have accepted it. The authenticity of this reading is proved as follows. In sūtra 999 there occurs the treatment of these dvaras. After having explained addāya dvāra Ac. Malayagiri writes the following sentence regarding the dvaras asi to vasă: 'evam asimanyādiviṣayāny api ṣaṭ sūtrāņi bhāvanāyāni'. Hence in this context the reading 'uḍupane' is authentic and original. If one were to accept two dvaras 'duddha' and 'pane' instead of the one 'uḍupane', then there would be seven sutras instead of six, whereas the commentator expressly states that they are six. The portion containing the explanation of the term 'uḍupane' of the concerned gāthā is missing in all the manuscripts of the commentary. Though
P. 31