________________
E. Leumann, An outline of the Avaśyaka Literature
objection and by M as an undesirable possibility. IV. First defence of the Bhāsya-point of view, in C & H. - Rejected by Śīl. with a
reference to Vis. V 516; for that reason stated by Hem. without full assurance as an
interpretation by the "elders" to avert the objection. Approved by M. V. Second defence of the Bhāsya-point of view
with Śīl. Exc. p.186 VI. Third defence of the Bhāsya-point of)
view
Thus, these misinterpretations of the Niryukti-passage have been made possible because our interval has been dealt with along with the savvabandha-interval.
ti-samaya-hīņam khuddam = minimum,
maximum = puvvakodī samao uyahī ya tettīsam || 19 Here minimum and maximum are equally applicable to both intervals. But C H M, for Jinabhadra's sake, quite arbitrarily, allow the words in italics to be applicable only for the savvabandha-interval. On the other hand, Śīlānka only wants to reserve ti- in the first line for that by which the opinion of Haribhadra's teacher would be given, but which would contradict the second line since it is in no way justified to follow Malayagiri to construe samao the first time correctly, and then to state it is equivalent to = samaya-hīņam (!) the next time. – If the second Niryukti-line would not speak against it, then the first, if need be, could be interpreted in Jinabhadra's sense, because the Niryukti-versifications, wanting to be as short as possible, sometimes become unclear or misleading and then have to be translated, not according to the actual wording, but according to tradition.
[45] After all that has been said, the five commentaries should be heard. However, we leave out as much as possible of what is only paraphrase of Av.-niry. X 19, respectively of Viś. V 528. The individual opinions are numbered for the sake of clarity according to our preceding lists, except with Sīlānka whose comments (partially because of a gap) do not let themselves be classified exactly. C: IV. Viś. V 528. ihânantarâtītabhava-carimasamaye orāliyasarītī savvasādam kātūņa khuddāgabhavaggahaniesu uvavanno, tassa pajjante savvasādam kareti, tato khullāgabhavaggahanam eva bhavati. ukkosenam puņa koi orāliyasavvasādam kātūņa 2tettīsasāgarovama-tthitīesu veuvviesu uvavanno, pacchā tāo puvvakod'āuesu orāliyasarīrisu uvavanno, puvvakodi-ante orāliya-savvasādam kareti tti. H: IV. ihânantarâtītabhava-carimasamaye kaścid audārikaśarīrī sarvaśātam kļtvā vanaspatisvāgatya sarvajaghanyam kşullakabhavagrahan'āyuskam anupālya paryante sarvaśātam karoti, tataś ca kşullakabhavagrahaņam eva bhavati. utkțstam tu trayastriņsat sāgaropamāni pūrvakoty-adhikāni, katham? iha kaścit samyata-manusyah audārikasarvaśātam kļtvā 'nuttarasureșu trayastrimsat sāgaropamāny ativāhya punar manusyeşv audārikasarvasamghātam kļtvā pūrvakoty-ante audārika-sarvaśātam karotîty. uktam ca bhāsyakāreņa: Viś. V 528. - III. guravas tu vyācaksate: tad-ārambhasamayasya pūrvabhavaśātenâvaruddhatvāt samaya-hīnam kşullakabhavagrahaņam jaghanyam śāțântaram iti. [I.]* tathā ca: kilaivam aksarāņi nīyante "trisamaya-hīnam kşullakam" ity, etad api nyāyyam evâsmākam (pratibhāti, kimtv atigambhīradhiyā bhāṣyakstā saha virudhyate. Śīl.: Exc. p. 186.... prāk-so ... ev' ādho ... niry. X 19. ti-vihīņam samaya-hīņam ca yathā-samkhyam. iha jaghanyam śātasya śātasya cântaram kşullakabhavagrahanam sampūrņam āhậto 'vasīyate 'tītabhava-caramasamaye śāta iti
I'rira- a. 2 tettīsamsāgo yo. 3 Presu By. 4 The attachment through tathā ca indicates that the following also belongs to III. But then after nīyante the text should continue differently. The Avacūri, which H writes out here, also even replaces trisamo.... virudhyate with tribhih samayena caikena hinam yatha-kramam samghāta-śātayor antaram ity arthah.
122 Jain Education International For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
