Atmanandji Jainacharya Janmashatabdi Smarakgranth

Author(s): Mohanlal Dalichand Desai
Publisher: Atmanand Janma Shatabdi Smarak Trust

Page 234

0. Stein explained in the foregoing Hai 21ait, Argi #fati fa. or, p. 355 (on 30, 39 ) Somadeva uses the comparison of pagalgfagari sa; the Tīkākāra says it gargrazera ga darati ganger barei gyfa. Though this is used only in an upamà, it shows both the authors well versed in the Brāhmaṇic ritual. p. 315 ( on 29, 16 ) the king is declared to be the embodiment of the “ three purusas,” thero exists no visible deity except the 2king; the following sūtra goes still further and explains this by the quality of the knight aga, being Brahman; for, he has to attain to the first stage of life ( as Brahmacárin ), to possess attachment to the highest Brahman, to stay in the Guru's family (for study ), to study in the proper way, being an ornament of the young generation ( as crown-prince). In sūtra 18 the king is described as Nārāyaṇa, in s. 19 as Pinākapāņi, i. e. Siva. These are the “ three TES” as the Commentator said already in his explanation of s. 16; it is, however, noteworthy that he understands ago as Visnurüpe, though Visņu is mentioned in s. 18. That is perhaps the single solid argument for the predilection of the Commentator for the Vaisņaya religion. There is another interesting passage in the Commentary on s. 18 where the king is said to be an embodiment of Narayana the supposed Visnuitic Commentator says: नाविष्णुः पृथिवीपतिरिति alytic: he explains the sūtra further by saying the king is similar to Nārāyana by loving his subjects, he has his Laksmi as Visņu, with her he goes through दीक्षा and अभिषेक, then the Tikakara repeats: तथा ना fator: qforaturaftfa atan. This sentence, differing from the former only by aTia instead of a is found in the text of the former edition p. 114. Either the new edition has by some mistake ommitted this sentence, as it is explained by the Commentary, thus presupposing the same text as in the previous edition; or, it has crept into the latter, being originally a gloss. This instance is a further proof how unsettled the question of the text of the Nîtiv. is still inspite the two
1 This sutra is nothing else but Kauti!. Arthas. VI 97, s. 7; Cari लोकं यापयति in s. 8 the same text defines अदृष्टकारितं देवम् s. 14f. correspond to Nitiv. s. 6. For the stand-point of Somadeva on ascetics 5, 23ff. p. 50f. cf. the Bhumika p. 28.
2 The reading in the previous edition inserts Ti before T .
Shatabdi Granth ]
.: 153