________________
A Recent Study of Bhagavartsutra Reviewed
75
Deleu's mind So at one place be translates hriyaya sptfak u Tonched by action (P80), at another place as "touched by karma' (p 100) while a third place he seeks to distinguish between 'com.pitting a knya' and being touched by a hrya' (p 111)-a non-exin.cat ditiadeon
(2) In connection with its elaboration of the Karma-doctrine Bhagaver often uses peculiar designations wbich are unknown w tbe classxal faida scholars and which Abhayadeva does his best to equate with the deg. dations actually known to him lo this connection Prof Deleu tus fails to take note of the Bhagavatı archaisms Here are a few cumples
(1) Bhagavati speaks of a karma type kanhsamokon va and the context makes it clear that the designation is a precursor of the classical darsane mohaniya Abhayadeva always cquates kankşawuhanja with darsan.mohanty but the archaism involved fails to attract the attention of Prof Deku too wbo in this connection only disputes Abbeyadeva s translation of the phrase kanksamohaniya (p 77) The dispute appears to be puintless For Abbaya deva's translation is "Karman that confuses, in consequence of greed,' Prof Deleu's one that causes greed' But since Prof Deleu s translation too abould cover the phrase-part mohaniya his tragslalion ought to be 'ode (ie the karman) that causes greed and thus confuses', but as thus completed this translation is virtually identical with Abhayadeva's
(il) Bhagavatı uses several designations for a karma-type endlog 10 rodyt; they are varnavadhya (P 89 a), vu yavadhya (P 94a), indrapadhya (p 952 a), vedavadhya (952 a) This ending first occurs in connection with marnadhya and there-but only there-Abhayadeva suggests that yarnabahya might be a alternative Sanskrit reading of the original Prekrit phraso vonkabatha Now in connection with all these phrases Prof Deleu has made k a point to Bay that for the Prakrit bajha bahya 18 a better Sanstrit rendering thes padhya His preference is unfortunatoas should become evident from a Ilttle historical consideration Thus the context makes it dear that owlybajha is the same thing as the classical Viryantaraya ind it is easy to see that otryavadhya deserves to be a better precurtor of vrywariye than Wiryabahya. However, much more important is another aspect of the matter and that escapes the attention of Prof Delcu altogether For warndpadky Indriyavadhya and vedanadhya Are the karmi-types for which there are 00 classical equivalent and they seem to incorporate an older understanding of the problem Thus in the case of cach of these Kurma-types which are all evil the classical theory would posit two Karma-types--one good and the other evil, so according to it, the possession of a beautiful complextion is due to a good karma-type, the possessions of an ugly one due to an evil one, the possosaton of five sense-organs is due to a good
