Indian Antiquary Vol 21

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 26

20
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
(JANUARY, 1892
dašâm gasya kalpåvatamsika 9, praśnavyâkaraṇasya pushpitâ 10, vipåkafrutasya pushpachulika 11, drishtivadasya Vrishnidasa 12, iti.
XIX. The seventh upamgam, chamdapannatti.
We have, before, frequently observed that a text of this name is twice cited in anga 3, and in conjunction with texts whose titles belong to upangas 5, 6, or to a portion of up. 3; that the order of succession of the titles in anga 3 (7,5, 6) does not agree with the present position of these texts, viz. the title of the chamdapannatti is there, and, in fact, in both the passages which concern this matter, placed before the others. The chamdapannatti is cited in the text of up. 6, as before remarked. [417] Taking these facts into consideration, it is in the higbest degree remarkable that the existing text is almost completely identical with that of up. 5, differing from it, for example, in about the same way as the two schools of the white Yajus differ from each other. The introduction is, however, quite different. The beginning consists of 4 âryâ strophes, of which 1 and 2 sing the praises of Vira etc.; v. 3 characterizes the work in the same words as are found in up. 4, introd. v. 3 and 5, 1. e. as pavvasuyasáraņisamdam - seo p. 394 - and v. 4 traces back the jóisara yapannatti to the questions of Gôtama Indabbûti. Then follow upon these four strophes the same 15 verses in an interrogatory tone, which in up. 5, too, state the contents of the 20 separate divisions (pâhuda) and subdivisions pâhudapâhuda. From this we can draw the conclusion that there is complete identity of subject and method of treatment. The legendary introduction, which refers the whole to a conversation between Mahavira and Indrabhûti, follows upon these 15 verses, and displays a few minor differences. From this point on, the text is similar to, and in fact, almost identical with, that of up. 5, with the exception of a few linguistic (e. g. râi, night, for rayani, rataņi, rajaņi) and stylistic differences. Our text is, here and there, somewhat briefer, which is compensated for by references to up. 3 and 6, which are lacking in up. 5. An exact comparison of the text of each will doubtless disclose many matters of difference between the two. Nevertheless, the inter-relation of the two is a fact, the remarkable character of which [418] is enhanced when we consider that Malayagiri composed a special commentary on this upanga also, which was cssentially the same as that composed by him on up. 5, and that in neither of his commentaries does he say anything in reference to the mutual relation of both texts and commentaries. (The statement just made appears to be correct, though I have not made here an examination of Malayagiri's com, ad amussim).
Until new facts come to light that will solve this mystery, we must be content to accept the present situation. In the passage in up. 6 in which up, 5 and 7 are citud -- see above, p. 414 - the text reads as if the first had reference solely to the sun, the second solely to the moon. Our texts of up. 5 and 7, however, treat both uniformly and in a completely similar manner.
XX.- XXIV. The eighth to the twelfth upamgas, nirayávaliyao, nirayavalikas.
Under this collective name are comprised five small texts of legendary contents (vaggas) in one " śrutaskandha." The first of these either bas the special title of "śrutaskandha," or is called kappiyâô, kalpikas. The titles of the others are kappa vadamsiyâ6, pupphiyao, pupphachůliyað or châlâô, Vanhidasâð. Each of the first four has 10, the fifth 12 ajjhayaņas.20 In the introduction to the first, all these five texts are characterized – see 372, 373 - As uvamgåņam pamcha vagga. We have seen above that this epithet recurs in the interior of no other one of the texts held to be upangas. [419] It must, therefore, be deemed a probable supposition, if we assert that this epithet at the time of the composition of these five texts was restricted to them alone in their totality since they belonged together from the very beginning. Their present position at the end of the 12 upangas is to be explained by their legendary contents, which shows them to be perfectly adapted to serve as a pendant to the
Ávi, and Svi.: amtagnadasAdipanchanham amgåņam niraykvaliy-sunkkhandha uvamgan, tammi pancha vagga : kappiy ko kappavadamsiylô pupphiy do pupphachdliya vanhidasdó, chaügu dasa aijhayaņš, pamchame berasa.