________________
10
(4) Fn. 50: 7120 PR0 of G, K is corrected by O as tare 830. (5) Fp. 67: G and K fto. K has placed small vertical strokes
near the head-lines of both the 'x's in order to separate these words from each other by putting a danda after each as is done by it at many other places. O reads against this : ag eft. Are we to understand that the vertical strokes of K are mistaken by the scribe of O as anusavāras while directly copying down the text of K in his Ms. O ?
Some instances of G and O coinciding against the readings of Kare mentioned below: (1) Fn. 122: G and O read #411HER which is corrected in K to
ममतामहेश्वर. ( 2 ) Fn. 170: G, O have fact against 25 of K. It
appears that thinking that afar is the correct word much more in usage than qafqat the scribe of Ms. K revised the reading of G to gafant, but O, while copying from K, Sanskritised the term hafal in its reading a gafatin which accidentally coincides with that
of G. (3) Fn. 61*: KFT° for guio of G, 0. (4) Fns. 88, 118": Ti and Ea are scribal errors of K against
the correct readings #algrat and ITT of G and O. (5) Fn. 140°: K reads sting fa for stiftràfi of G, O.
Now we may turn to the similarities of K and O against G a few instances whereof are given below :
(1) Fn. 22 : K, O drop the word gai. (1) Fn. 28: K, O have are for aint He of G. (2) Fn. 31: The first of the names of the female friends is a
against G आलि. (3) Page 3: K, O regularly number the first nine of the female
friends, while G does not give numbers with the names (vide
fn. 33), ( 4 ) Fn. 35: K, O omit the name vir and add AT EI. ( 5 ) Fn. 37: The order of the names all and art is changed
in K, O.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
