________________
Jinešvarasūri's Gahārayanakosa
"ranaranaarajja dovvala...': in SP gives us a clue to correct the doubtful reading in the presat Kośa as 'ranaraņaya-rujjadubballaehim.
D. 31 v. 390 The editors' proposed emendation well agrees with the corres
ponding reading in Gathasa ptasali (pilfa ). p. 34 v. 430 The reading in Vajjalagga (v. 346) is faca sursdaor in place
of "तह अन्नजुवइनेहेण" in the present Kosa, p. 33 v. 450 This gāthā occurs in Gātha saptaśati (VI. 18). There the
text reads "bahohabharia' and the rading bahulla-phuria' is recorded in the foot-notes. The latter part of the second half in GS reads : Savahavatthan gaan pemman.' The Editors of tho present Kośa read 'Satahavattham mae pimme' and add a question-mark. The SP (p. 1211) correctly reads : Savahavaftham gae perme.'
p. 39 y 499 The opening words of this gātha present corrupt readings.
The editors' emendation जंपि य [१ पियमगंलवासणाए too is not helpful. We should read with Weber (No. 837): * 4131 Armatuurd. cfagy" in the second half of this gāthā is obviously a
misreading or misprint or scrlbal error for "facet". p. 39 v 501 The second half of this gāthā reads differently in Lilavat from
where this gāthā is picked up :
जाणं चिय पियविरहो जाणसु दुक्खीण ते पढमा ।
. It is, of course, more meaningful. p. 39 v. 505 Gathāgaptašatı (No, IL 53) presents somewhat different
readings : विरह-करवत्त-दूसह-फालिज्जतम्मि तीअ हिअअम्मि । अंसू' कज्जलमइल पमाणसुत्तं व्व पडिहाइ ।।
These readings make better sense. 40 v. 516 The first half of these two gathās presents different readings :
and 999HEt fə farzas TETE377 3jai fù ARETOT I p. 72 v. 73 qeyTMATE 9575 VEE217 stai fahrOT 11
The first half needs to be corrected as;
पच्छाभिमुहो वच्चइ पहरहओ अंबरपि मोत्तूर्णं । p. 41 v. 519 [ar? ]# should be corrected as :
