History of Canonical Literature of Jainas

Author(s): Hiralal R Kapadia, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad

Page 272

APPENDIX : Schubring's ĀCĀRĀNGA ANALYSIS
255 sentence esa magge upto nôvalippejjāsi, in 10, 30f, appropriately concludes the brief summary of the discipline, but when it - likewise coming after the ending ejjā - appears in 8, 3 it disturbs the thought-process which, as we have seen, just continues going beyond the limit of the uddeśa. As little suited are uddeso upto aņupariyattai in 2. 6, kim atthi upto n'atthi in 4. 4 and eyam moņam (nanam) (sayā) samaņuvāsejjasi in 5, 2.4 and 6. 1 whereas all these turns of speech in their first occurrence in 2, 3.4 and 3, 4 are felt to be organically related. That the optative ending of the third person singular is changed, in defiance of the metre, into that of the second with ejjäsi is a feature which, as is well-known, the Ācāranga shares with the Sūtrakstānga, Uttarādhyayana and Daśavaikālika.
There yet remains to be discussed a phenomenon which can be called "loosening" and which consists in that the beginning of a familiar wordseries or an enumeration which at another place has called forth a fit continuation has done an unsuited one in the present case. The loosened series is, as is understandable, apt to disturb the thought-process and the sentential structure and direct them into false trails. Se jahā after se bemi in 3, 6 is to be explained from 27, 9 where a simile does actually follow, the out of ordinary sayam in 3, 13 from 3, 1 where it stands in contrast to anne, the line 10, 2 which suddenly preaches the prohibition against murder from 28, 2 where it fits the context, fakadam karissāmi'tti mannamāṇe in 11, 20 from 7, 1 where a justification of violent activity is thereby offered. So had perhaps the memory of parinnāya before 15, 28 called forth the same line in 14, 3 after samäyāya, the memory of koham ca etc. in 17, 11 which is followed by eyam pasagassa damsanam..... called forth the same period in 16, 23 after a briefer series. Āņāe lambho n'atthitti bemi in 20, 12 stands instead of the probable anae n'atthi lambho on account of na vijjai, n'atthi-tti bemi occurring in 17,15 20,26; it could not be the only place where tti bemi is just a loosened expression. Ceva after eesu in 22, 17 occurs as it does in the avanti-sentences, lastly in 22,13; see p. 54. hiccă uvasamam suits only 19, 31 not 28, 17 where the oncoming fall-back – just this being the meaning of the two words --- is first handled in the line 21. The half-sloka pānā pāne kilesanti cut off into 29, 16 evidently owes its appearance to the passage in Sūtrakrtānga I 2 2.14 caragā 'du vā vi bheravā, adu vā tattha sarīsavā siyā; here there actually is the talk of wild animals and the serial succession is based on thought not on sound. te phāse puttho 'hiyāsae in 31, 20 is to be traced back to 22, 5: te āyankā