________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.orgAcharya Shri Kailashsagarsuri Gyanmandir
6. This reading appears to me to be in every way better
than that of the PAli Dhammapada. Sambhrama is better than sařstava, but especially gami is 80 obviously preferable to kāna (for the Prákrit text the hypothesis of a gross mistake is done away with by the absence of mā is the first pâda) that I can only doubt if the Pali reading is not the result of a mistake. Probably this is an old error, and it may be thought that the Pali redaction is based upon some version expressed in a Prakrit, analogous to that of the present text, where the substitution of the tenues
for the sonant (cf. adhikachati, etc.) was frequent. c. Above the letter read ja remains some trace of a
horizontal stroke, which, according to an observation of M. d'Oldenburg, marks the aspiration of j in our
manuscript. d. One might be inclined to read višeşarn; but the
lower part of the spear in ş or in analogous characters is so often twisted in the cases which exclude the interpretation m (cf, gami of the following line, the $ of şaraka, A4, 6, etc.), and the probable notation of the anusuára is so rare in our manuscript (I do not know of any sure iostaoce of it in our fragments of Paris) that I do not hesitate to transcribe as I have dona.
3 apramadi pramodia ma gami ratisabhamu
apramato hi jayatua chaya dukhaga pramunió o
Cf. the Dhammapada verse referred to in the
preceding line.
a. This time the sign of the aspirate is wanting above
thej, as often elsewhere. But this curious peculiarity will be brought home to us by a paleographic
examination. b. The Sanskrit will be kshayan duḥkhasya prāpnuyāt.
Pramuni= Pali papune. In lines 6 and 7 we shall meet successively with amoti for āpnoti, and pranoti for prāpnoti. The nasalisation of p into m does not appear solely due to any memory of the compound pr surviving its disjunction into pun, for B, 24 has maro= punah, Pali pana.
For Private And Personal
