________________
APPENDIX I
ADDITIONAL NOTES In the use of the preceding volumes, I have found some errors and some points on which I could make additional comments. A new edition of part of the Trişaștio has raised some questions. Some reviewers also have found some errors or debatable points; perhaps more than I have seen. But no one has offered any explanation for the real difficulties, e.g., the mātpo and pitsmedha, the black-flowered tamāla, the gupyadguru, et cetera. I, p. 111 (1. 2. 359 ). Dipamallī is a “lampstand.' See II,
n. 82. I, p. 119 (1. 2. 479). Supratiștha is a 'bowl.' See II, n. 386. I, p. 123 (1. 2. 533 ). Prof. W. Norman Brown in his review
of I (JAOS 52, 88) suggests emending 'bālakā' to 'vālakā.' The emendation, as he says, would be trifling, but it is not necessary. References to children being passed from lap to lap are commonplace. Being passed from hand to hand is not so common, but it occurs, e.g. 8. 3. 298. The gorgeous clothes with gold appliqué of Indian children on festive occasions justify the comparison
with gold and jeweled pitchers. I, p. 129 (1. 2. 618). In the same review Prof. Brown takes
'dāmaganda' to mean a garland-cluster.' PH gives
samūha' as one meaning of ganda, but apparently only from a single occurrence in the Ausgewählte Erzählungen in Māhārāștrī, where the meaning is very doubtful. (See Meyer, Hindu Tales, 56 n.). It seems to me much better to take it simply as 'ball.' (Cf. MW, gandaka,
ball’; H., genda or gendā, 'ball.'). 1. would correct my definition of śrīdāmaganda (1, p.475) from a 'golden ornament,' to a 'ball with beautiful garlands.' I do not understand where PH, s. v. śridāmaganda, gets its
Jain Education International
www.jainelibrary.org
For Private & Personal Use Only
