________________
310
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[OCTOBER, 1892.
nijjutti being extant. The title of the fourth mûlas, expressly declares it to be a nijj.; and since both the others have essentially the same form, it is not an improbable conjecture to regard these too as nijjuttis to a sûtram of like name. On the other hand, however, special nijjuttis on each are cited by the scholiast, and these nijj. appear to be still extant. Of this kind are probably the two texts which the author of the Avasy. [42] nijj. 2, 5 declares that he composed on dasakalia and uttarajjh°.
The prose portions found here have in places the old introductory formula: suyam mê âusam..; and the concluding formula of each of the ajjh. (and uddes.) of malas. 1 and 3: tibemi gives us an impression of their antiquity. Furthermore, the titles of all the 36 chapters of the first múlas. are enumerated in the fourth auga, § 36 hence this mûlas. with essentially the same contents must have existed at the date of anga 4. It appears to be cited also in the Kalpasútra. In N. (above p. 11 fg.) we find only the three titles of the mûlasûtras I have before me the name of the fourth is omitted, and the title of the second plays there, as in the Anuyôgadv. (above pp. 11, 22 fg.), a very prominent part.
A very ancient author is quoted for the third mûlasûtram; and a single chapter (14) of the Av. nijj. is ascribed to a definite anthor, although the author of the Av. nijj. himself says, in the beginning of chap. 2, that he is author of a large number of nijjuttis on the most different parts of the Siddhânta, especially on several chêdasûtras, and, as already mentioned, on mulas. 1 and 3. The Avasy. nijj. contains, therefore, a large amount of authoritative data in reference to the date of its composition.
The contents of all three texts belongs to the sphere of the vinayapitaka. The Nom. Sgl. Masc. of the 1 Decl. ends generally in o, but chiefly in e in the few prose sections; but both forms are found together occasionally, and in fact even in the same verse.
[43] The extent of mûlas, 1 is stated to be 2095 gr., that of 2 or its nijj. 2550, that of 3, 700 gr. The author of the commentary on 2 is said to have died Vira 1055.
XLIII. First mûlasûtram, the uttarajjhayanam, in 36 ajjhayanas. The names of these ajjh., which are cited (see page 280) in anga 4, § 38, are identical with those in the MSS. with but a few exceptions. By the chhattisain cha apuṭṭhavâyaraṇiim, mentioned in the Kalpas. Jinach. § 147, we must understand the Uttarajjh. according to the scholiast (Kalpalata). See Jacobi, p. 114. The correctness of this number (36) is corroborated by the concluding verse of the work itself. Haribhadra, on Avasy. 8, 54, explains the isibhâsiâim mentioned there by uttarajjhayanidini; and ibid. 2, 5 both isibhâs and uttarajjh° appear in conjunction in the The scholiast on Nandi explains (see p. 13 n.) the name uttar° by the sarvêshâm adhyayanânâm pradhânatvam which belongs to this work. The author of the Avasyakanijj. states (2, 5) that he is also author of a nijj. on the Uttarajjh.
text.
With the exception of chap. 29 and the beginning of 2 and 16 which three chapters commence with the formula: sayam mê âusam tênam bhagavayê êvam akkhayam (or t. bh. Mahavirêņam Kâsavêņam e. a.), the text is composed in metre and principally ślôkas, though there is an admixture of gåthâs, trishtubh, etc.30 The contents consist of direct ordinances in reference to a correct course of life, especially of the clergy, [44] and of recitals and parables illustrative of this life. Much of the contents makes upon us the impression of great antiquity and recalls similar Buddhistic texts and especially anga 2.
-
On this mûlas. we have a very detailed commentary, śishyahitâ, by Sâmtisûri (Sâmtyâchârya) in which frequent reference is paid to a nijjatti belonging to the text.31 See pp. 41, 43.
29 So also the anyê in the Vidhiprapå; see pp. 429, 480.
30 The metre is often very much out of order, as in almost all metrical parts of the Siddhanta.
51 In a palm-leaf MS., dating itself 1307 (A. D. 1251) the 3 appears to me to be for an original 5; in which case the date would be 1507 (A. D. 1451). According to Jacobi, p. 9, the commentary of Dêvêmdragani, which was ecomposed Samy. 1179 (A. D. 1123), is based upon that of Saintisuri.
