________________
SACRED LITERATURE OF THE JAINS
193
This entire statement has been given on p. 257. We have already seen (pp. 284 ff. 349, 352, 361, 363 and 3) that its appearance in anga 4 was secondary, and that here we frequently meet with the older readings. When in the insertions in the angas made by the redactor (even in anga 4) any reference is paid to his enumeration, the citation is from the Nandi and not from anga 4. The Nandi and not anga 4 is therefore indisputably the source whence these citations are drawn. But whether or no the account here is really to be regarded as the source whence came the account in anga 4, appears to me to be still in dubiis. This assumption is rendered improbable by the fact there are very great differences in these accounts, not to mention that that of anga 4 is much more detailed. If, however, we regard the account in the N. as the source, then that in anga 4 is secondary and enlarged after it had effected a lodgment in that angas. [19) But on the other hand it is a perfectly legitimate conclusion that the account in N. and in anga 4 were drawn from a common source now no longer extant. Finally, it must be stated that the entire section in N. almost gives me the impression of being a secondary insertion. The fact that it too contains the most wonderful statements, called into existence by the effort of pure fancy (cf. especially the statements concerning anga 6 and anga 12), cannot readily be reconciled with that tradition which regards the Nandı as the work of Devarddhigaại, the nominal redactor of the whole Siddhanta. Devarddhigami would have expressed himself in a more sober, definite way, and would not have given rein to such monstrous figments of the imagination. We must not, however, suppress the fact that the Päksikasūtram takes no notice of this detailed statement of contents and extent 45 of the 12 angas, but limits itself merely to the enumeration of the twelve names.946
Then, too, the general observations in reference to the duvālasaṁgar ganipidagar, which are joined on to the account of each of the twelve angas, are found here in just the same form as in anga 4; cf. pp. 368, 369. The five kärikas form the conclusion. They
945 I call attention here to the mention of the name Bhaddabāhu on anga 12, pp. 360,
367. It is noteworthy that he appears in the same gradation (though last in order) as the names Dasara, Baladeva, Vāsudeva, Harivansa, and consequently as a mythological personage.
946 This is introduced in just the same manner as the previous one. See pp 10.13 :
namo tesinh khamāsainananań jehin imam vāiya duvālasangan ganipidagam, tam jaha..., and concludes in the same way; savvehin pi eyammi duvalasange ganipidage bhagavathte sasutte...... F.-13
