________________
NOVEMBER, 1891.]
SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS.
869
(382) There is a commentary by Abhayadêva, a vârttikam or avachûri by Parsvachandra. In reference to the difference of the constituent paris which were united to form this uvamgam, the reader is referred to Leumann, p. 20, who has made some pertinent remarks upon the subject.
XIV. The second upangam, rêya pasénaïyyam, which is always translated by rajapraśniyam. This is perhaps to be explained as a complete misunderstanding of the Prakrit title by which this text is always cited in those passages from the hand of the redactor which refer to our text in the aigas, etc. For pasêụaïyyam cannot properly be praśniyam, since the latter word rather pre-supposes a Praksit form paņhiyam. Pasêņaïyyam seems, according to the conclusion at which I arrived ad Bhag. 1, 32, to refer to the name of king Prasênajit who is well-known in the legends of the Jains.24 There is, however, one important objection to this conclusion, there is no mention of this king in our text, which mentions a king Puêsi but no Pasênai. Inasmuch as the authenticity of the form of the name pasêņaïyyam cannot be gainsaid, 27 there remains but one possibility open: that the original title of the text has been preserved and either the name of Paesi has been substituted for that of Pasêņa 128 (see p. 384) in the text, or there has been substituted an entirely different text for the whole of the old one. [333] Though the latter conjecture savours of boldness, we are not without analogous examples us we have seen in the case of argas 8 - 10. Our first means of explanation appeals much more to our sympathy, especially as we have a perfect parallel in a later legend. We possess two recensions of the Samyaktvakaumudikatha, in the first of which the scene is laid at the time of " Srêņika, son of Prasênajit," in whose place Uditódaya, son of Padmodbhava appears in the second. This is, however, brought about in such fashion that 'Sreņika is referred to in a two-fold introduction. The legend in question appears to be old and to antedate the two existing recensions of the Samyaktvakaumudikath.
The Sanskrit translation of the title Rayapasê naiyyam by rajaprafniyam is very far from being in harmony with the contents of the work. The burden of the very smallest portion of its extent is in our text the questions of a king. The questions play here no greater röle than in any other of the legends similar to this in which a king requests instruction. The irreconcilability of this Sanskrit title with the contents of the work itself makes eo ipso for the conclusion that this title is nothing but a mere makeshift to conceal the original contents.
It is, therefore, of no little significance that a beautiful conjecture elaborated into an investigation by Dr. Leumann has shown that one of the Pali texts of the Buddhistio Tipitaka,
- viz. the Pay Asi-suttam (Dighanikaya 1, 2), - is especially closely connected (384) with that part of our upanga which treats of king Paêsi. It is apparent, then, that we must assume either a common foundation for both or the use of a special Buddhistic work as a ground-work. That the original text of the RÂyapasénaïyyam might easily, have suffered a transformation, is indicated by the irreconcilability of this title with the Sansksit translation and with the contents. Thus the old name Prasénajit gave placo to that of our text Paĉsi (Pâyâsi in Pali).
It is noteworthy that at the conclusion of the work there is an exclamation of reverence addressed to the Jinas, to the sayadevayî (sruta) blagavai, to the pannatti bhagavai, and to the bhagavat arahat Påsa. Joined to this exclamation are some very corrupt words, which are perhaps to be restored as follows, 20 Passasayassa vânie. It is at least certain that Pisa, and not Mahavira, is glorified in this paragraph. Could this not be a residuom of the original text,
26 See e. 9. arga 8, p. 320.
* In Nandi, Pakshikas, and Avi. the name is rayapa(pprla niya; Svi. and V. have słņays; the passages in the toxta showing the hand of the redactor always have the forri Halyya.
Loumann is of the opinion (Aupap. p. 9) that the 1 R yapaalnalyys arose by "connection with Raja Prasenajit by popular otymology." It seems to me, however, that Rayapasēņaïyya is the prius and rfjapraśniyam the posterius.
* .. nambhagavad) arabad, Plaassa, passé supasse, posavpl namd A, arahanto para suposal passavapł4 pam) E, arabatto paand aupassa vapie namo E, arabartó paus suyassa všple damo G.
