________________
E. Leumann, An outline of the Avasyaka Literature
addition, some apothegms that derive from smaller Upanisad-texts show that they already had been handed down with little exactness; naturally, a few more mistakes turn up in the Jaina lecture (like the alleged particle gnim in 2' and the corruptions in 72, etc.).
[37] What is missing with H(aribhadra) is in parentheses and with Ś(īlānka) in square brackets; what is only in the Curni is in small print. The citations found in H are numbered in the order he gives them, outside left, with small numerals. The number of Ganadhara-s can be found there, and in connection with it the corresponding citation and an exponent, which indicates what number it is in the context. Our lay-out follows the Bhāṣya-commentaries. At the head it always names the stanza at the time of whose explanation the same ones list the citation or group of citations for the first time. Later, explanations are to be found only with Hem(acandra). Where the citations occurring in the Bhāṣya itself are to be found is indicated each time by the added accounts in italics after them. The Haribhadra-manuscripts (BSSΣo) have been distinguished by italic initials from the Hemacandra manuscripts (BbSIIBr)2. As far as the contrariety of the citations is concerned, the reader can easily see whether they should illustrate the pro- or contra-standpoint. Only with the first Ganadhara have we separated both groups from each other by means of a hyphen. During the correction Hillebrandt has furnished us proof of two citations.
II 5. (yad3 ahur Nastikāḥ*:)5
13
1'3'101
63
etävän eva puruso yävän indriya-gocaraḥ,
bhadre, vrka-padam paśya yad vadanti bahuśrutāḥ'|| piba khäda ca sadhu śobhane, yad atītam vara-gātri tan na te, na hi bhīru gatam nivartate, samudaya-matram idam kadevaram ||
(Bhaṭṭo 'py aha:)
1254 f.
3
vijñānaghana evaitebhyo bhūtebhyaḥ samutthaya tany evânu vinasyati, na prêtya samjñā 'sti. Brh. Ār. Up. II 4,12. - Also on II 39. 137. - II 40°. 41°.
42.
(Sugatas tv aha:)
na rūpam bhikṣavaḥ pudgala ity[-ādi].
anya tv āhuḥ:
vāsāmsi jirṇāni yathā vihāya navāni grhṇāti naro 'parāni tathā sarīrāṇy aparâparāṇi jahāti grhṇāti ca Pārtha jīvaḥ ||
**
It is not impossible that the syllable gnim in the last line constitutes a wrongly read anusvara-symbol. The sentence containing it, presently in Vedic manuscripts, looks something like goda vad. In the eighth century, or earlier, the anusvāra, occurring here, may have had a form that a Jaina, to whom it might not be known, might have thought he could render correctly with gnim. Subsequently, because of the context a dot over should have been placed.
[(tatha ca Vedaḥ:)]
na ha vai sa-sarirasya priyâpriyayor apahatir asty', aśarīram
2 BB 1322, b = B 1933, II (P mentioned in the Av.-Erz. p. 36) = P XXII 1228, Br= Br 2103 (only looked through at some passages by my brother). - II is apparently the master manuscript of S, but such that, most likely, a corrected copy X comes in between. S, itself, has been corrected according to another manuscript. Therefore, it has to be differentiated between a first-hand S1 and a second-hand S2: only $1 is based on II in as much as the corrections done in x make themselves perceptible.
In Poona there are, besides II, still four Hemacandra-manuscripts: VIII 768 (related to IIS), XII 58, XXIV
.... yath' Ś.
Jain Education International
4 eke Ś.
5 eke āhuḥ C.
6 loko 'yam 60 Hem. & Malay.
7 °nty abah C, SEO, Ś, BbS, Malay.
8
tatha HS. 1' & 14 are missing in C.
9
= Bhagavadg. II 22 (MBhār. VI 900), where the second line reads
tathā sarīrāṇi vihāya jirṇāny anyāni samyāti navāni dehī
- In C only a Jaina citation follows:
kāyā anno mutto nicco katta tah'eva bhotta ya tanu-metto guṇavanto uddha-gai vannio jīvo || Cp. this with Das.-niry. 227 f. V-XI.
102
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
