________________
(24)
Fns. 154, 155: S 19 = faga of G is revised in Kass Tilaut faga, which is still revised (but wrongly ) by the scribe of O as ९ लक्षपदात्यो विद्यते.
(25)
Fn. 163 : : afetar of G is corrected in K as a giferaf. ritar, which is copied down in O with the scribal omission of the repha thus : Tu algatai.
(26) Fn. 175: G 371: gfe at: is changed in K to 27 * 3Trafega
Here the word 39: is added to the original reading which is perhaps not clear to its scribe who, however, missed the visarga while writing down and on finding out this error afterwards he put a small vertical stroke above s to indicate that a visarga is to be inserted there. The scribe of Ms. O first wrote 371 372909fesa: thinking that the stroke indicated an additional 1, but afterwards became conscious of its absurdity in light of a: and replaced this
I with a visarga, (27) Fn. 184 : TTTM a i of G is revised (?) in K with a re
petition of कथं as कथं राज्यलीलां कथं न करोषि. The scribe of Ms. O became conscious of this repetition which he omitted while copying the reading of K.
(28) Fn. 190: Gagfa fa fa Hoti:,
K 281 à 2011,
0 381 fagut. (29) Fn, 191: G does not enumerate the eight damsels presented to
Ja ya simha by Ma dana bhrama; while K and give their names in the same order with slight differences as noted below: K: नामानि । प्रीत्तिमती १ प्रियतमा २ अभीष्टवक्ता ३ कामप्रिया ४ मृगलोचना ५
चंदवदना ६ पृथुलश्रोणी ७ मनोहरा ८. ०: नामानि । प्रीतिमती प्रियतमा २ अभीष्टवका ३ कामप्रिया ४ मृगलोचना ५ चंदबदना
६ पृथुलश्रोणी ७ मनोहरा ८. Thus in the first name fer is rightly corrected by O as fa but it has not numbered the name as 1. Name no. 3 appears to be in reality
feat, which is written down in K as oathil probably due to the influence of an inaccurate pronunciation ; while correcting this reading O rightly inserts the repha but misses the takāra! The sixth name is again wrongly spelt in K which is blindly copied down in O.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
