________________
37
khana-pos-howa-wasehin' Due to the inconsistency in its meaning there, the commentator had to write 'Tairyukta iti gamyam', but, on seeing the Sutras 'owa-iya' and 'Rayapaśena-iya', it is found that this reading should not be there where it has been written down On the basis of both the abovementioned Sūtras, the order of the text in view is constructed thus-'O-sahaBhesajjenam Paḍılābhemānā bahūhın Silawwaya-güņa weramaņa-Paććakhāna Posahowa-wāsehin ahaparıggahi-e-hin tawokamméhin appāņam bhāwemānā wiharanti' In sutra 2/1, in all the specimens, the text is sarakallāņa Jawa kewa-in' but 'Jawa' serves no purpose here. On the basis of 8/217 of the Bhagwati as weil as the first stenza of the Prajnapanã here the text is ascertained to be Jawati, instead of 'Jawa'
too
In many instances, the meaning does not change by an alteration of letter but difficulty arises in understanding the meaning and sometimes it changes In Sutra 6/90, the reading is 'hawwin'; and 'hetthin' as well as 'hitthin' the two recensions are also found. The commentator Abhayadeva Suri has given the meaning as 'Sama' there (See the commentary-leaf 271). In the sthānanga Sutra (143), on the same topic, the reading is as, 'hitthin' Abhayadeva Sūri has given its meaning there as 'below the Brahma-loka'. (See the Sthānanga-vritti leaf 410)
In same places the varient readings occur due to the mis-understanding of the transcriber and difference in characters in scripts In Sutra 9/195, the reading is as 'Odharémāni-odharémani'. In some specimens this reading is found in the form of 'uwadharemāņio-uwadharemanio'. In one copy, this reading is changed into 'uwari-dhare-māņio-uwari-dhare-manio'.
A few examples of recensions have been cited here to show that manuscripts or only one particular copy cannot be taken as the basis in the redemption of the text It can be redeemed only on the basis of various Āgamas, their commentaries and consistency of their meaning.
The problem of abridgement and redemption of the text
It is a task to lay down authentically the method of abridgement adopted by Devardhiganı at the time of writing the Agama Sutras. And, it is a task because many Agamadharas have abridged the Agama-text in later periods Probably, same transcribers too, for the sake of convenience of transcribing, have abridged the text
In the abridged text of sutra 13/25, the dewoddeśaka of the second Sataka has been referred to indicate the kinds of Bhawanpati Dewas etc, but the full text is not there (2/117, page 111) and the sthanpada of the Prajnapnā has been referred to. Likewise, in the abridged text of Sutra 16/33, the third
