________________
COMMENTARY
109
p. 560
unpleasantness. 2. He whom that reaction bits, has only and alone been overcome by a suffering originating from sensual pleasantness. 3. This suffer. ing - we might also say : effect of Karman, since the prose treats the word dukkha alike with kamma in chaptar 9 - is a "dormant" one (śānta). For, Karman which is not in the condition of rest (aśānta), is already turning into effect, and one can therefore no longer awaken it to the latter (udirei).
The word dupāņa, which occurs four times, is according to 21,6=uda pāna. kiva (20) a bird, cp. Sen, Paṇhāvāgaraņāim 31,24. vahner...niḥśeşam ghātinām śreyo bhavati; icchati (26) = șcchati.
16. yasyêndriyāņi dravair iva na parisravanti vişay'ācārah, sa etc. The wordorder of the text is strangely forced, as in 8. The suggested comparison, derived from asrava, re-appears in vippavahato pava-kammassa: he who yields to pleasant impressions [disposed] for the absorption of bad Karman, which carries [him] away [into new existences].
In the motto, indiya is obviously acc. neut., as in st. 4, in st. 1 and 2 the masc, obtains. In (3), one expects sārıram
17.
The word ima in st. 1 points to something preceding, which can only be st.2. Should we have the motto before us in the prose at the end, and in st 3 ff. its exposition ? In the latter the words joga, sāvajja, niravajja. would have been resumed as usual.
18. To tam kaham iti, which introduces the discussion in 16, corresponds here 1.1 and 5, se kaham etam, and the name of the Rși can scarcely follow it, but must precede it and conclude the matto ayate...vajjam samadiyati. "The soul, which does not control itself, uses strong means (vajra) (for its purposes)", i. e. such as the ordinary circumstances offer it. Thus, the bird uses (st. 1) its beak, and the water carrier thong and rope.
19. The chapter completely stands off already by the fact that it classifies instead of bringing the nane of a Rşi. Moreover, as we saw already, the materialistic doctrines given here, are incompatible with the basic character of the work without their refutation. Thaņa 343a registers only the beginn. ing, and the commentator Malayagiri is, owing to the dificiency of the tradition, so little familiar with its meaning that he renders ukkala by utkalati, vşddhim yāti, and rajju by rajya. Doubtlessly, we have here utkața before us, people who have a high opinion of their power of conviction.
