________________
104
THE CANONICAL NIKSEPA
the canonical literature (e.g. "samasena" in 14b reminiscent of the Nandi style - No.66 14 above). Also a solitary "programme verse" like vs. 14 could not have formed an integral part of the texture of a work like Uttaradhyayana. There is no scope for any conjectures, but it seems hazardous to separate vs. 14 from the following execution and to integrate it fully into what may be considered the original text of Uttaradhyayana. - Vs.21 is an alternative for vs.20 (ahava ...).
A careful comparison of Sutra and Curni (Curni p.274) even throws doubt on vs.8. In spite of its key position, this stanza is ignored by the Curni which comments only upon vss. 1-2 and 9-11 (referring the reader for the following verses to the Daŝavaikālika Cūrṇi). If vs.8 is spurious, we have to assume that the original Sūtra text and the Curni thereon (not the Curni on the Niryukti!) supplied a much simpler version of the tava complex: five "mahāvratas", to use the later term, plus rai-bhoyana (all in Uttaradhyayana 30.2) plus anasana (Uttaradhyayana 30.9 foll.). For the sixfold set (ahimsā etc. plus rãi-bhoyana) see inter alia the following: Sūtrakṛta 1.2.3.145 (S.I, p.107); Sthana 7.659 (S.I, p.276); Aupapātika 33 (S.II, p.23 lines 3-4; LEUMANN, § 57, p.63); Daśāśruta 2.22-42 (S. 11, pp. 919-20); Daŝavaikālika 4.5-11 (S.II, pp.949-51); Mūlācāra 5.91-99 (OKUDA pp. 56-57).
For the interpretation of the individual verses, the reader is referred to the translation given by JACOBI in SBE 45, pp. 176-78. A study on the settlement nomenclature (vss. 16-17) has been prepared by 0. STEIN, Jinist Studies, pp.1-30. Further references: CHARPENTIER p.384; BARNETT, note 1 on p.45; Kalpa Bha.vss. 1089-91. For the standardized pattern of the begging tour (vs. 19) refer again to SCHUBRING § 153 and DEO (p.169 [and p. 187 ff. for general information on penance and fasting]). The catch-word is represented in more than one form: unoyariyā (vs.8); OMOYARANAM (vs. 14); OMĀNAM (vss.20 and 23). For the summarizing character of pajjava in vs.24 refer to the verse Mūlācāra 7.50 (LEUMANN, Übersicht, p. 17), which seems to use the term in a similar way. The correct etymology of ahiya (a-hṛta = "delivered", "uttered") and viyahiya (vy-ā-hṛta = "declared", "stated") has, according to our knowledge, nowhere been mentioned. The OMOYARANA nikṣepa, as available in Uttaradhyayana 30, differs in its wording considerably from the OMOYARIYA nikṣepa (No.53 29), but the basic element of calculated reduction of food is the same.
NO.73$33.
KALPASŪTRA 118. REFERENCES: AJC pp. p.22; JACOBI p.263.
n' atthi nam tassa bhagavantassa [Mahāvīrassa] katthai PADI BANDHE.
-
pp. 110-111; S.II, Pariŝiṣṭa 1,
