________________
Walther Schubring's Analysis of his 1910 Acaränga-Sutra (Ayār'anga-suttam) edition
by fire and by thrusting or knocking (pharisa). Nevertheless, the grouping pretends (to give) a content of these sections, a content which should relate to the injury of fire and of wind! Deviating from the normal sequence in which the four elements earth, water, fire and wind are put one after the other (e.g., in Das. 4) the vau-sattha does not appear in the fifth uddesa. One sees that in the arrangement the redactor has let himself be led by the position of the verses, where the words eja and sampāima, both wrongfully, have been brought in relation to the wind element.
Now, did the redactor have before him the entire dhuva-gandiya for all classes of being, or did he vary the model in the second uddeśa five times, for the sake of the uniform construction of the chapter to be compiled? The situation that the repetitions unhesitatingly reproduce the syntactic confusions in 2, 9. 11. 13. 15f., and the fragmentary beginning in 20, speaks in favour of the latter assumption. Here, then, a kind of independent operation on the text would become visible at first, one that is not without parallels. It is namely apparent that for the attainment of a good uddeśa conclusion, sentences from suitable places have been repeated. The sentence esa magge until nôvalippejjāsi concludes the short summary of the discipline in 10, 30f. appropriately; where it appears in 8, 3-also coming after the ending ejja-it disturbs the train of thought which, as we saw (p. 57 above), immediately continues beyond the uddeśa limits. Just as little do the following fit in: uddeso until anupariyaṭṭai in 26 (13,7); kim atthi until n'atthi in 44 (20, 26); and eyam moṇam (nāṇam) (sayā) samaṇuväsejjäsi in 5 2,4 (24, 30) and 6 1 (28, 13), whereas in the first occurrence of all three phrases in 2 3, 4 and 3 4 one finds them natural. That the optative ending of the third person singular was changed unmetrically into the second person, ejjāsi, the Acār. is known to have in common with the Su., Utt. and
Das.
237
We have still to talk about a feature which can be called an "induction" (Auslösung) and consists (in the following): the beginning of a common word sequence or an enumeration which links well in another place, but which does not bring about a suitable continuation in the case in question. The induced series, as is obvious, is capable of disturbing the train of thought and sentence structure, and to take them in a wrong direction. This accounts for se jahā vi after se bemi in 3, 6 from 27, 9 where a simile really follows; the conspicuous sayam in 3, 13 from 3, where it appears in opposition to anne; line 10, 2, which suddenly preaches about the prohibition of murder, from 27, 2 to which it belongs in context; 'akadam karissämi' (59) ti mannamane in 11, 20 from 7, 1 where thereby the reason for the violent act is given. So also probably: the recollection of parinnäya before 15, 28, brought about the very same line 14, 4 after samāyāya; and koham ca, etc., in 17, 11 followed by eyam pasagassa damsanam.... this very sentence stems from 16, 23f. after the shorter series. For 20, 12 (ande lambho n'atthi tti
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
