________________
174
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[MAY, 1891.
after Vira ,24 and this name is perhaps attested by epigraphic testimony of the time of Götamiputra Satakarņi. If we suppose that the reading Têrêsika, proposed by Bühler (Archæolog. Survey of West. India, 1882, p. 104) for the inscription Nâsik No. 11, is conclusive, it is not improbable that it refers to the Teråsiyas quoted above. Bühler, it must be confessed, has adopted another explanation of the name in his Survey.
The explanations of the scholiasts have as yet not assisted me in the endeavour to discover what is referred to by the four nayas, 15 &c. [352] It is a significant fact that the twelfth anga, according to the above statements, treated not merely of the proper but also of heterodox doctrines, or, as the case may be, of hermeneutic methods; and the title of this anga seems to refer to this peculiarity in its contents, which was probably of great moment in determining the fate of the last of the augas. See pp. 248, 342.
The suttai are cited as constitating the second part of the diųhiráa. In all there are 88 suttai, & number ascribed to the second part in anga 4, 88. In reality, however, there are but 22, beginning with ujjuya (ujjusua N; rijuka), but conceived as divided into four parts. The proper orthodox (sasamaya) doctrines and the heterodox views are represented as being equally authoritative. The former are divided into two different forms which are also represented by the ajiviya (Gôšalakapravartitapåsharda Abh.), or têrasiya. The 22 names are not explained by the scholia. They refer17 the name sútra to the explanation of the meaning of the půrras, and consider this as well as the first part as an introduction to the third part of the ditthiva which follows.
(353) The third part is composed of puvva gaê, pûrvagatam, i.e.18 the 14 pûrvaņi, which the tirthakara (Mahavira) himself is said to have imparted to his scholars, the ganad haras- see above p. 216, 217-who then composed the angas (achârâdikam). Besides this explanation which represents the púrvas as older and earlier doctrines anticipating the augas, there is another which is possible. If our second conjecture is correct, we should have to understand by the purras that preliminary knowledge necessary to the comprehension of the doctrine. The titles of the 14 púrra:19 quoted here in the text and enumerated before in $ 14 are explained singly in the scholia, and the number of their padas is stated. The enormous size of these figures greatly
further explanation of the same trairilika in the schol. on N. iste sarvan vastu trayitmakam ichhathti, tad yath : jivo 'jivo jivajivaí cha, loko VykolókA.lokas cha, sat azt sal-asat: mayashimtiyim dravyłatikam paryâystikari ubhayastikar cha; tata: tribhi(h) raibhis charaiti 'ti trair bikas, tanmatena sapta 'pi pari karmíni uchyante. It is worthy of note that the triad form ascribed to the Trairisikas is made use of cf. p. 266 - in anya 4, where the statement of the contents of angas 2 -- 5 is given, and in fact with the citation of two of the examples quoted here. Accord. to the schol. on Kalpas, cf. Jacobi, p. 119, the Vaiseshikadarśanam took its rise from the Térssiyas.
14 Cf. Avaiy. 8, 37: Achim (@bhir paigamadibhir nayaih) dithivel paravan suttaatthakahap ya.
15 nayAb sapta naigamAdayah, Daigamo dvidha, sami.nyagribi viseshagrihi cha, tatra "dyah sangrahê dvitiyas tu sainvyavaharê pravishtah, tatd dvau sangrahavyavaharau, rijusutras chai' kab sabdadayas chn trayo'py eka eva nayah kalpaté, tata êvam chatvára éva naych, étais chaturbhir nayair E.dy ni shat parikarmiņi avasamayavaktavyata ya chimtgartê; on this see Braúka on asga 1, , 8, above p. 347n.
16 The ujjusuya and the pariņayApariraya are stated to be the first two in the series. As regards other names reference is made to the Nanai and not to the independent treatment of the subject further on in anga 4. See above p. 284.
17 Sarvasya parvagatasútrarthasya sdchanft gutriņi, tani cha sarvadravyno sarvaparyfy knih sarvanayanari BarvabhagavikalpAnim prakAsakani dvavir batih prajnaptini, tath Arijusatram iti adi.
18 Cf. Schol. Him. 245 : parvanath gatan jnanam asmin purvagatam. The anonymous author of the Vichiriimritasain graba which contains in 26 vich Aras a grouping of siddhinta passagos, (Apukas, states that the purvagatakrutadbaras were called vachaka, or, acoord, to the Nandivritti, cited by him, but which I have not seen, three other names vadi ya khamasamane divAyarl vâyaga tti égatta I pavvagayammi tu eutte sadda pauttanti. Can the Vicharamritasazhgraba be identical with the Siddhintalapakôddhira of Kulamadana, Sany. 1409 - 55 cited in Kl. 255b?
15 Thoy agree in general with those in Hêm. 247, 243. The explanation is likewise identical ; see the schol. ibid. The number of padas is the same as that stated in the introduction to the Kalpintarudchyuni. In this work the number of vaati (i vastu) of each purra is said to increase from 1 on by geometrical progression (8192 in the case of purva 16). Here however in the text itself-see p. 366 - we find entirely different figures which are quite credible. The figures in the case of 1. 3. 7. 10 vary somewbat in the enumeration of the pårvas in Némichandra's pravachanuskrôddhira $ 92, v. 719-25.
