________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.orgAcharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
line li, " the last line, in his plate A". These lines, considered by him as two separate verses, appeared to us to be but integral parts of one single verse. To be clear, let iis quote the lines as manipulated by him :
.. madenamakabha devanasamidh(i)gat.
(A?, 1)
april .........................
...
.
.
...........
apramada prašajhati pramalı garahitu sadla
(4", 17)
Ho las taken A!, 1 to be the seminant of a verse for which he could find no parallel in Pāli or in Buddhist Sanskrit. It is obvious that in commenting upon it he completely lost sight of the Dhammapada verse 30, which rearls :
Appamādenn Maghari derānañ setthatain guto
Appamådari pasarosanti pamado garhito sada er elie he vonld not have been led into equating kabha of mutlinbhu vith a Sk. garbha (see pp. 55-6), but would have easily suggested that the Prakrit wkubhu is the connterpart of the Pali Maghavit. But coming to 1", 17 he made a right hit on the aforesaiil Pali parallel, forgetting, however, to engnire whether A’, 1--which he had already come across--with the reading mailena makabha levanusamillligat. , which soundled so close to the Pāli (appamäilena Maghanū ierānunt setthalanin gol(o), conld he referred back to in order to fill up the gap. But he could not possibly do so without putting the Plate A? immediately after A", and thereby impairing his adjustment of the plates arranged in the orler A, Al. His failure to combine A", 17 and A?, I into one verse is, it seems, due to a fatal oversight, and this oversight on his part led is to examine the fac-similes appended to the text plited by him, and we found that the top of the fragment A? was hroken in such a way that it could be exactly fitted into the bottom of the fragment
For Private And Personal
