Mahavira Jain Vidyalay Suvarna Mahotsav Granth Part 1

Author(s): Mahavir Jain Vidyalaya Mumbai
Publisher: Mahavir Jain Vidyalay

Page 649

180 : SHRI MAHAVIRA JAINA VIDYALAYA GOLDEN JUBILEE VOLUME
पंचिंदियाणि कोहं माणं मायं तहेव लोहं च।
दुजयं चेव अप्पाणं सव्वं अप्पे जिए जियं ॥ ३६॥"
Some scholars seem to have been confused in the intricacy of the sense of these verses and especially 36ab is believed to have confounded the matter all the more by its presenting a sudden change in metre and certain nouns ending in with no verb or participle for completing the sense.
Jacobi remarks on verse 36 : “ The first line of this verse is in the Āryā metre, the second in Anuştubh; the whole will not construe, but the meaning is clear. There are numerous instances in which the metre changes in the same stanza from Āryā to Anuştubh, and vice versa, so frequent they are that we are forced to admit the fact that the authors of these metrical texts did not shrink from taking such liberties."
CHARPENTIER refers the reader to these remarks of JACOBI 'concerning the metre' and adds: “but the sense of the whole verse is not clear, and the construction is extremely confused.”
The commentators-even Sāntisūri (11th century) and Nemicandra (1073 A.D.)-interpret '87c9|oj '--B716HI-in verse 36 as 17:, the mind, They, too, appear to have been confused by the ending in of all the nouns occurring in the first three quarters and try to solve the difficulty by arguing that "
H
a lagafacer:", i. e., the employment of neuter in the case of all these nouns of masculine gender is due to the licence enjoyed by the ancient authors !
Prof. L. ALSDORF has contributed very nice articles on the Uttarādhyayanasūtra, in one of which, entitled “Namipavvajjā : Contributions to the study of a Jaina Canonical Legend ", published in the Indological Studies in Honour of w. Norman Brown (American Oriental Society, New Haven, 1962), he has made a praiseworthy effort to solve this intricacy. He starts with these remarks:
“This (i.e. JACOBI'S remark) is certainly wrong. The Āryā metre alone would suffice to prove that the line in question is an interpolation; but its contents, too, make this quite certain : the king's answer is solely concerned with the fight against the atman; krodha māna māyā lobha are totally out of place here. The clumsy interpolation might alone account for the impossibility to construct the stanza, of which CHARPENTIER also complains; but there is probably more behind it."