________________
Walther Schubring's Analysis of his 1910 Ācārânga-Sūtra (Āyär'anga-suttam) edition
239
(p. 58) as being put in its place by way of conclusion (p. 53). Whether it is to be read metrically is questionable because the form -uv-is known to be avoided. The pāda: māhanena maimayā is known from the Vimoho (32, 22 35, 2 and 41, 26). The next pāda can also be read as an āryā. In this case, one would like to metrically emend the conclusion bhagavayā evam riyante (41, 27), which can be achieved with some violence: bhagavayā evam riyanteņam (bhagavam is two-syllabic as in 42, 23). But probably there is to be a point after bha and evam riyam te is to be read: "so it is to be gone by you". The deformed form riya = *rtya is made amends for by te which, in directly turning to the listener, finds its complete counterpart in the earlier uddesa conclusion ejjāsi (e.g., 7, 128,4 10,6). Moreover, it was unnecessary to attach a conclusion to the individual sections because in the word bhagavam, at least for the second to the fourth sections, a concluding climax was already thought of.
The punctuation in the printed text follows the traditional idea of a continuous context. Nevertheless, an investigation into the metrical relations explains how it was undertaken.
Jacobi 1884a pp. 595ff. and 1886 pp. 336ff. has dealt with the form of the āryā as found in the Uvahāņa-suya appearing in Sū. I 4 and in Sutta-Nipāta 8 and 14 (see Alsdorf 1968 (WB)). Its characteristic as opposed to the later type is: instead of the fourth foot the concluding anceps syllable after the third and the arsis to the fifth with two or three morae, in the latter case a trochee, and also the uniformity of both half stanzas; the 2nd and the 6th foot predominantly has the form of an amphibrach. Apart from these types A and C is the separate type B which has retained from A the thesis of the 3rd foot, but which in the manner of C allows a complete 4th foot to follow; it also has the shortening of the 6th foot in the second half stanza characteristic for C. Utt. 8 also evinces this form B, where as a rule both halves are built like C, but are equal (see Alsdorf 1966 (WB)). In our text there are following B as the first lines of a stanza: 11° (metrically more exact: jaha); 56 60 (sayaņam or sejjam); 7* 9* (the 6th foot is defective); 150 2 20 70 3 86 106; as the second line: 2 664 10 (if těicocham can be read) 36 (read: chāyāē); following C as the first lines: 1 100 (Nāe or vire instead of (61) Nāya-putte) 200 (read: pamajjyā) 2 16 (the second half) 14"; as the second line: 2 12 (read: tusņie) 146.
Tristubh beginnings are in 1 1662 109, probably also 1 22 if one is allowed to restore bāhum pasārettu parakkamejjā. Similarly the tristubh rhythm is latent in 2 2 and 4 145, for which one should compare the pāthântaras. I see a sloka beginning in 3 78 = 35,9; 2 39 begins with prose. In the printed edition only 2 10 is indicated where, in dismissing the stanza with the words esā pucchā, the Cūrņi seems to have doubted its authenticity.
The remaining full and half lines are āryās of the type A and, moreover, more or less metrically correct, if according to this (correctness) one considers the amphibrach in the 2nd and the 6th foot, surrounded by anapests or spondees in the 1st (here also iambuses), 3rd, 5th,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
