________________
APPENDIX i
2. See Introduction, n. 1
3. Pannalal suggests that Amṛtacandra and many post-Akalanka authors drew their materials specifically from Akalanta's Ra'avārtika. See his introduction to the Tattvärthasara of Amṛtacandra, p. 7
147
4. Haribhadra's Laghvitika, of which latter half was completed by his disciples, does not serve for the reconstruction of the original text of the T. S.. as it preserves the text as well as the Bhasya imperfectly. For instance, the Laghvitikā cuts off the aphorisms IV :24-26 and 36-39, with which their Bhasya expositions are totally lost. (See also a remark made in Ch. II, n. 4) To give a cursory observation of the Laghvitika, its first six chapters are devoted to the summaritical exposition of the major purport of the Bhasya but not its exegetic explication, som: portions of which are the total or the partial duplication of Siddhasena's Tika, and the rest of the chapters show virtually the total duplication of the Bhaṣyāṇusāṛini. As such, the Laghvitika must have been produced from the Bhāṣ yanusarini, but not vice versa. (See also remark made in Pt. Sukhlalji's Commentary on Tattvarthasutra, Introduction, pp. 60 ff.) Hence the restoration of the Sabhasya T.S. must be made from the Bhaşyānusāriņi.
Chapter II
Siddhasena's commentary on the s.kārikā begins with, 'ri vardhamānasvamine namah atha sri siddhasenagaṇi-praṇitā dvitiya țikā prārabhyate', and ends with, iti svopajña-sambandhakārikāḥ ṭikā-dvaya-sametāḥ samaptāḥ'. 2. viram praṇamya sarvajam, tattvärthasya vidhlyate/
tika samksepatak spasta, manda-buddhi-vibodhini
3. Namdisuttam and Anuogaddāraim, Introduction by D. D. Malvania, p.54 (English)
4. In this connection it should be mentioned that the bracketed portion of V:29Bh. in K.P. Mody's edition (also in the Bombay edition of Rayacandra sastra māla) which appears in Haribhadra's Laghvi tattvärthațika cannot be the original paragraph, but the later accretion. Its teleological reasoning in support of the threefold natures of sat does not go with the ontological proof attempted in V: 31 Bl.. Neither its dialectical tone is congenial with the writing of the Bhaṣya,
5.
Sihana 10.972. dasa-vihe daviyaṇuoge p-o tam-o daviyaṇuoge mäuyaṇuoge egaththiyanuoge karamäṇuoge appiyaṇappie bhaviyabhävie bahirabahire sasayasäsae tahanane atahaṇāne
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
