Jain Journal 1992 07

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 28

JULY, 1992
statements which are not so readily set aside as incorrect or impossible, differences which exist partly in these statements themselves, partly in their relation to the actual facts. First, the difference to the number of ajjhayanas in anga 6, according to A and Abhayad, there are 19 and such is the actual state of the case-but according to BCN197* there are 29. Then as regards anga 8 the 10 ajjh, are wanting in N.198 The number of the vaggas (7), of the udd. (10) and of the samudd. (10) is in N everywhere 8; likewise as regards anga 9 N has the number 3 as in the case of the vaggas, and in that of the udd. and samudd.; in the case of anga 10 N adds 45 ajjh. and in that of anga 11 likewise 2 suyakh. In reference then [290] to the actual facts, we must make the preliminary observation that the division into uddesagas in the case of angas 8-11, and that into samuddesagas in general in all the angas, is not denoted in the MSS.199* The other differences refer chiefly to the fifth angam which has no division into ajjhayaņas; in that anga they are called saya (sata), and their number is not 100 but 41 or, including the sub-sayas, 138; likewise the existing text has only 1925 (not 10,000) uddesagas. A special demarcation of vägaraṇa sections is unknown,200 What can possibly be the meaning of 36,000 vāgaraṇas and only 84,000 padas! (cf. Bhag. 1,376). The differences in reference to angas 8-11 are not less remarkable. As regards the vaggas (8), anga 8 agrees with N. but has, not 10 (cf. anga 3,10), but 93 ajjh ;-anga 9 has likewise not 10 (cf. again anga 3,10), but 33 ajjh; anga 10 has ten däras cf. the ten ajjh. in anga 3,10 whereas we have here no information about dāras or ajjh., and N, on the other hand, speaks of 45 ajjh.-anga 11 has in agreement with N the 2 suyakh, which are not mentioned in the source of information before us. In the case of anga 12 there is no possibility of comparing the statements in question with the text, since there is no longer any such extant.-See below.201
23
197* According, to Leumann N Ed. has 19 and not 29-Here again, as with anga 1, only the first Srutaskandha is intended by the assertion of there being 19 ajjhayanas and not 29. In the same way only Part I. of anga 11 has been known to the author of anga 3, 10 as has been shown above on page. 270.-L.
198 According to Leumann this is not so in N Ed.
199 This statement requires some modification: see the closing words of angas 8-10 in Weber's Cat. II., 502 (8). 507(9) 520(10: dasasu ceva divasesu uddisijjanti......); anga 11 has in the place a reference to anga 1 (see ibid. 534) which, however, has the same bearing.-L.
200 This demarcation, or the number 35,000 representing it, is also found in the table of contents of anga 5 preceding the statements in reference to the extent.
201 I will note here merely the fact that in the section in reference to the twelfth anga, Bhaddabahu is mentioned by name, whom tradition proclaims to be the last teacher of this angam or of the fourteen purvas; see above. p. 214. It is furthermore stated that therein was contained a section in reference to Bhaddabähu and to his history.