________________
120
SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS
elaborated into an investigation by Dr. Leumann has shewn that one of the Pali texts of the Buddhistic Tipițaka viz, the Pāyasi-suttam (Dighanikāya 1,22),- is especially closely connected [384] with that part of our upanga which treats of king Paesi. It is apparent, then, that we must assume either a common foundation for both or the use of a special Buddhistic work as a ground-work. That the original text of the Rayapaseņaiyyam might easily have suffered a transformation, is indicated by the irreconcilability of this title with the Sanskrit translation and with the contents. Thus the old name Prasenajit gave place to that of our text Paesi (Payāsi in Pali).
It is noteworthy that at the conclusion of the work there is an exclamation of reverence addressed to the Jinas, to the suyadevayā (śruta) bhagavai, to the pannatti bhagavai, and to the bhagavat arahat Pāsa. Joined to this exclamation are some very corrupt words, which are perhaps to be restored as follows, 695 Passasuyassa vānie. It is at least certain that Påsa, and not Mabăvira, is glorified in this paragraph. Could this not be a residuum of the original text, which had a right to the title rāya paseņaiyya and which perhaps treated of the relations of King Prasenajit and Påsa ? Pasa, it should be noticed, appears as a teacher in up. 10, 11. The seer glorified in our present text is at least called Pasāvacciyya, i, e, scholar of Pāsa ; and appears in a recital put in the mouth of Mahāvira as the teacher of king Paesi. In the other legends, in which [385] any such Pasāvacciyyas occur, they are invariably characterized as converts to the teachers of Mahavira. See above p. 300. Malayagiri attempts to find this reference to the Påsavacciyyas a special proof of the connection of upānga 2 with anga 2, which, he maintains, treats of the views of the foreign pasaņdas.
We were for some time left in doubt whether the references in the angas to the Rayapaseņaiyyam were in reality all contained in the Rayapaseņaiyyam (cf. Jacobi Kalpas. p. 107); but Leumann has shown that this doubt is without foundation. See above, p. 299. But, granted the actual occurrence of all these citations, this fact only makes for the conclusion, that, at the period of these remarks by the redactor, the substitution, which I assume, was already a fait accompli. Nor does this exclude the assumption that our text originally possessed a content that was really in harmony with its title.
695 ( namo bhagavao) arahao, Pasassa. passe supasse, passavāni namo e A, arahanto
passe supasse passavante namo E, arahanto passe supassa vārie namo E, arahanto passe suyassa vänie namo G.
