________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra www.kobatirth.orgAcharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
6. I am not at all convinced that the Pâli reading
sangamajuttamo may be something else than the result of a confusion of writing, skilfully arranged. At all events, there is nothing to look for in our text but the nominative sangrama uttamaḥ.
7 saha['sa bi ya gasana" anathapa][ sebha' ya şutva uvašamati
.....
e
e
( 57 )
should be admitted that sahasani is an inversion for 'sahasina. But the variant sahassam sahassani "thousand thousands" is at least as plausible as the other expression.
[Foot-notes: Fr. C vii. 2 Fr. C x1.]
Cf. Dhammap., 100.
a. I should not dare, on the appearance of the character alone, to decide positively if it must be read sa or ya. But in several cases we find & for th, for instance, in sisila, Cro, 32 (C, 30?).
6. The character which I read bh is again the same as before.
8
[sata bhase anathapadasahita"] s.hu ya şutva uvasamati
> Fr. C XI.]
[Foot-note:
Cf. Dhammap., 102.
a. Although there is nothing left but a faint part of the characters, the agreement of the main leaf puts the restoration of the verse beyond doubt. As regards the gaps, it is less certain that they can be filled up almost exactly from the Pâli; for in that case the present verse will be repeated, without variation, together with line 10. It is probable that some differentiation of detail may have been intended, sufficient to justify, in the not very scrupulous judg. ment of the Buddhists, the repetition of the stanza in two formulae very much bordering on each other.
For Private And Personal
