Indian Antiquary Vol 20

Author(s): John Faithfull Fleet, Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 31

JANUARY, 1891.)
SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS.
28
A), laddhana ya samahim uttamam, jjhaņajógajuttå uvavanna (vatta B) muộivaruttami, jala anuttarèsu pávaṁti (påvêti A) jaha aņuttaram tattha visayasokkham, tato73 ya chuyå kamena kahimti samjaya, jaha ya amtakiriyam, éé (êtê BC) annê ya êvamadi 'ttha jáva.
X. The tenth angam, panhavagaranaim, prasnavyákaranáni, in ten dáras, treats in a dogmatic and not in a legendary form, of the ten ethical duties, viz.; first of the 5 adhammas or anhayas, dýrava,74 which must be avoided. These are, -injury, to life, [327] lying, robbery, anchastity, (love of) possessions, and then of the 5 dhammae, or savivaras, (i.e. the opposites of each of the above sins.76
The difference between the title and the actual text or contents, between the actual text and the statements of tradition on this point, is especially great. There is nothing said in reference to questions (prašna) which find their solution (vyákaranam.) The whole anga appears to be a didactic dogmatic explanation addressed to Jambu, but not asked for by particular questions. The Nandi and angu 4 state that it contains 45 ujjhayaņas, 45 uddésanas, etc.; but no such conclusion is warranted from the facts of the case, cf. p. 286. One suyakkhandha, which these anthorities and the existing constituent parts ascribe to the text, is branded by the scholiast Abhayadeva. He asserts that the text "pustakóritaré"76 consisted rather of two suyakkhandhas (each containing 5 ajthayaņas). To prove this the scholiast adduces verbatim et litteratim a special introduction confirmatory of his assertion; but this cannot be found in the MSS. of our text. This introduction has the same usual form as the introductions to anyas 6-9 and 11; and Abh. refers directly to anga 6 for the correctness of his explanation, whereupon he adds : ya che ha dvi[328]śrutaskamdhatô 'kta 'sya si na rûdhû, êkaśrataskamdhatây à éva rûcbatvåt. In all probability the enumeration of this text in anga 3, 10, in the sixth place among the ten dasáu, shows that it stands in close connection with the present text or its 10 dáras. But we have seen, p. 272, that the names of the ten ajjhayanas there have no connection whatever with our text, and that the author had before him quite a different text under this name. It is an important feature, that, as stated above, his statements or names are in essential harmony with those statements of contents in reference to our anga, which occar in iga 4, or in the Nandi; see page 334. It is of interest in this connection to notice the character of the remarks of the commentator at the beginning of the passage, in reference to the name praśnaryákaranndrecs. This name, he states, is found, kvachit-it is found in anga 3, 10 and in anga 4, (see p: 334) - and consequently points to 10 adhyayanas of praśndndin vyákaranáni. His words are:-ayat cha vyatpattyarthô 'sya pûrvakalo 'bhůd, idanim ta aśravapamchakasamvara pamchakavyákşitir evo 'hồ 'palabhyatê, atiśayanam (cf. p. 334) pûrvacharyair aidayuginápushta (naprio?) lari banapratishêvipurushâpékshayô 'ttåritatvîd iti. However the corrupt conclusion is to be understood Lcf. Ed. p. 499--one fact at least is patent; that we have here traces of the manifest consciousness that the pirtácharyas were acquainted with a different text of this anga than the aida nyugina. Everything shows that we are completely justified in asserting that we no longer possess anga 10 in its original, [329] or in its apcient form. The introductory words in the commentary of Abh. are a proof of this :-sri Vardhamanam anamya vyakhyâ kâchid vidhiyaté 1 praśnavyîkaranamgasya vrida hanyâyânu saratah || ajñå vayam, sastram idam gabhiram, prayó 'sya kûțâni cha pustakani | sutram vyavasthapya tatô vimțiśya vyakhyanakalpad ita eva nai 'va II 2 11
It is perfectly plain from this that there is here a violent polemic against other text-forms.
19 anuttararimâniblryah.
** i.e. derava, for which we should expect 6snara. In the explanation : "A abhivthink frauti bravati karma yêbhyas te abravali", snanti sravati should probably be read for srauti spavati. In up. 1, anhấti is actually explained .by donauti but nlso by diravati badhnati [it corresponds in fact to Sanskrit aniti, L.).
15 tēsim råmåņi, jah: himsadaran 1, musavayad. 2, tëņiyad. 3, mēhunad. 4, pariggahad. 5, ahimsad 6, machohad. 7, atêniyad. S, bambhacherad. 9, apariggabad Aram 10 (Vidhiprapa).
1 Likewise in the Vidhiprapâ : ittha kêi parchahiin ajjhayaņēhin dó suyakkhandbe ichhamti. " This is self-evident, since the bontents are actually divided into two parts. To pustakantare punar évam upõdghstagrartha upalabhyate.