Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1It remains for me to add a few remarks about the two works which have been translated in this book. The Afaraaga Sftra, or, as it is sometimes called, the Samiayika’, is the first of the eleven Angas. It treats of the A44ra, or conduct, which falls under the last of the four heads, or anuyogas, into which the sacred lore is divided, viz. Dharmakatha, Gazita, Dravya, and Karazakarana. The Akaranga Satra contains two books, or Srutaskandhas, very different from each other in style and in the manner in which the subject is treated. The subdivisions of the second book being called A lds, or appendices, it follows that only the first book is really old. That it was considered so even in later times, is apparent from a remark of Silanka, who wrote the commentary, which is the oldest one extant®. For speaking of the mangala or auspicious sentence which, according to a current theory, must occur at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of each work, Silanka points out as such the first sentence of the first lesson of the first lecture, the first sentence of the fifth lesson of the fifth lecture, and the latter half of the 16th verse in the fourth lesson of the eighth lecture of the first book. It is evident that he regarded the A#ar4nga Stra as ending with the last-named passage, which is the last but one of the first book. The first book, then, is the oldest part of the Afaranga Satra ; it is probably the old A#aranga Satra itself to which other treatises have been added. For it is complete in 1 See Professor Weber’s remarks on the possible bearing of this name in the treatise I had so often occasion to quote, p. 243 seqq- ? It was not, however, the first commentary, for Silaaka mentions one by Gandhahastin, . xl viii GAINA SOTRAS.
2For it is complete in 1 See Professor Weber’s remarks on the possible bearing of this name in the treatise I had so often occasion to quote, p. 243 seqq- ? It was not, however, the first commentary, for Silaaka mentions one by Gandhahastin, . xl viii GAINA SOTRAS. itself; it describes in rather enigmatical language the progress of the faithful towards the highest perfection. The last lecture, a sort of popular ballad on the glorious suffering of the prophet, was perhaps added in later times, but as it stands now it serves well to illustrate and to set a high example of the true ascetic’s life. But the greater part of the book is in prose of the most bewildering kind. Frequently we meet with fragments only of sentences, or with sentences which it is impossible to construe. This reminds us of the style of the Brahmanical Satras; but there is this difference, that in the last-named works the single aphorisms are the necessary links in the logical concatenation of ideas, while in our book the single sentences or parts of sentences do not seem to be connected with one another in order to carry on the illustration of an idea. They do not read like a logical discussion, but like a sermon made up by quotations from some then well-known sacred books. In fact the fragments of verses and whole verses which are liberally interspersed in the prose text go far to prove the correctness of my conjecture ; for many of these ‘disjecta membra’ are very similar to verses or Pddas of verses occurring in the Sitrakrit4nga, Uttarddhyayana, and Dasavaikalika Sdtras. They must therefore be taken as allusions to standard authorities. The same must be © assumed of at least some prose sentences, especially those which are incomplete in themselves. Other passages again seem to be added to those quotations in order to explain or to complete them. I shall give a few specimens. I, 4, 1, 3 we read, aho ya rao gatamamé dhire; this is a Pada of a Trishfubh, and accordingly a quotation. The words which follow, say4 A4gayapannane, explain the meaning of that quotation, aho ya rao = saya, gatamaze dhire = 4gayapannémve. The text continues pamatte bahiy4& p4sa. This is probably a Pada of a Sloka; the rest of the sentence, appamatte saya parakkamegga, is the moral application of the preceding one. We should therefore translate: ‘Day and night exerting himself and steadfast,’ i.e. always having ready wisdom. ‘ Look, the careless stand outside,’ (there- INTRODUCTION. , xlix fore) being careful he should always exert himself. The commentator however does not separate the quotations from the glosses, but takes all these passages as parts of one sentence, which he interprets in the way that it has been rendered in the text of my translation, p. 37.
3, xlix fore) being careful he should always exert himself. The commentator however does not separate the quotations from the glosses, but takes all these passages as parts of one sentence, which he interprets in the way that it has been rendered in the text of my translation, p. 37. In this as in many other cases I have preferred to give in my translation the meaning which Silanka has given in his commentary. For it is sometimes extremely difficult to separate the quotations from the remaining text. I have never dared to do so when they could not be proved to be parts of verses. I had therefore to leave unnoticed all such passages which, as the one quoted above, might be taken as a Pada of a Sloka; for in every prose work such passages occur, though they never were meant for verse. They may, therefore, only accidentally resemble parts of a Sloka in our book too, though the great number of such passages is rather suspicious. The greatest difficulty however we should incur if we were to point out the prose quotations, though there are certainly such, e.g. I, 3, 1,1, sutta amuzi, muzizo satatam gagaranti. Such phrases differ in style from the rest of the prose part; but it would be impossible to draw the line between them and the work of the real author. From what has been said, it will appear how difficult it is to do justice to such a work as the first book of the A#araiga in the first attempt to translate it. In most cases I have contented myself with rendering the text according to the interpretation of the commentator. It must be left to future labours to come nearer the meaning of the author than it has been preserved by the tradition of the scholiasts. Formerly the first book contained nine lectures instead of eight, one lecture, the Mah4parinn4, being now lost. It was, according to some authorities, Samavay4nga, Nandi, Avasyaka Niryukti, and Vidhiprabha}, the ninth lecture; but according to the Niryukti of the A&4ranga Satra, which contains a systematic exposition of the subjects treated in the single lectures and lessons of the A#4rAnga itself, and 1 See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 251 seq. [22] d ] GAINA SOTRAS. to Silanka and the other commentators, it was the eighth lecture. It contained seven lessons, and treated of some details of ascetic life?. The fact that the same subjects were treated in the second book probably occasioned the loss of the Mahaparinné, ‘because it was superfluous ®’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1It remains for me to add a few remarks about the two works which have been translated in this book. The Afaraaga Sftra, or, as it is sometimes called, the Samiayika’, is the first of the eleven Angas. It treats of the A44ra, or conduct, which falls under the last of the four heads, or anuyogas, into which the sacred lore is divided, viz. Dharmakatha, Gazita, Dravya, and Karazakarana. The Akaranga Satra contains two books, or Srutaskandhas, very different from each other in style and in the manner in which the subject is treated. The subdivisions of the second book being called A lds, or appendices, it follows that only the first book is really old. That it was considered so even in later times, is apparent from a remark of Silanka, who wrote the commentary, which is the oldest one extant®. For speaking of the mangala or auspicious sentence which, according to a current theory, must occur at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of each work, Silanka points out as such the first sentence of the first lesson of the first lecture, the first sentence of the fifth lesson of the fifth lecture, and the latter half of the 16th verse in the fourth lesson of the eighth lecture of the first book. It is evident that he regarded the A#ar4nga Stra as ending with the last-named passage, which is the last but one of the first book. The first book, then, is the oldest part of the Afaranga Satra ; it is probably the old A#aranga Satra itself to which other treatises have been added. For it is complete in 1 See Professor Weber’s remarks on the possible bearing of this name in the treatise I had so often occasion to quote, p. 243 seqq- ? It was not, however, the first commentary, for Silaaka mentions one by Gandhahastin, . xl viii GAINA SOTRAS.
2For it is complete in 1 See Professor Weber’s remarks on the possible bearing of this name in the treatise I had so often occasion to quote, p. 243 seqq- ? It was not, however, the first commentary, for Silaaka mentions one by Gandhahastin, . xl viii GAINA SOTRAS. itself; it describes in rather enigmatical language the progress of the faithful towards the highest perfection. The last lecture, a sort of popular ballad on the glorious suffering of the prophet, was perhaps added in later times, but as it stands now it serves well to illustrate and to set a high example of the true ascetic’s life. But the greater part of the book is in prose of the most bewildering kind. Frequently we meet with fragments only of sentences, or with sentences which it is impossible to construe. This reminds us of the style of the Brahmanical Satras; but there is this difference, that in the last-named works the single aphorisms are the necessary links in the logical concatenation of ideas, while in our book the single sentences or parts of sentences do not seem to be connected with one another in order to carry on the illustration of an idea. They do not read like a logical discussion, but like a sermon made up by quotations from some then well-known sacred books. In fact the fragments of verses and whole verses which are liberally interspersed in the prose text go far to prove the correctness of my conjecture ; for many of these ‘disjecta membra’ are very similar to verses or Pddas of verses occurring in the Sitrakrit4nga, Uttarddhyayana, and Dasavaikalika Sdtras. They must therefore be taken as allusions to standard authorities. The same must be © assumed of at least some prose sentences, especially those which are incomplete in themselves. Other passages again seem to be added to those quotations in order to explain or to complete them. I shall give a few specimens. I, 4, 1, 3 we read, aho ya rao gatamamé dhire; this is a Pada of a Trishfubh, and accordingly a quotation. The words which follow, say4 A4gayapannane, explain the meaning of that quotation, aho ya rao = saya, gatamaze dhire = 4gayapannémve. The text continues pamatte bahiy4& p4sa. This is probably a Pada of a Sloka; the rest of the sentence, appamatte saya parakkamegga, is the moral application of the preceding one. We should therefore translate: ‘Day and night exerting himself and steadfast,’ i.e. always having ready wisdom. ‘ Look, the careless stand outside,’ (there- INTRODUCTION. , xlix fore) being careful he should always exert himself. The commentator however does not separate the quotations from the glosses, but takes all these passages as parts of one sentence, which he interprets in the way that it has been rendered in the text of my translation, p. 37.
3, xlix fore) being careful he should always exert himself. The commentator however does not separate the quotations from the glosses, but takes all these passages as parts of one sentence, which he interprets in the way that it has been rendered in the text of my translation, p. 37. In this as in many other cases I have preferred to give in my translation the meaning which Silanka has given in his commentary. For it is sometimes extremely difficult to separate the quotations from the remaining text. I have never dared to do so when they could not be proved to be parts of verses. I had therefore to leave unnoticed all such passages which, as the one quoted above, might be taken as a Pada of a Sloka; for in every prose work such passages occur, though they never were meant for verse. They may, therefore, only accidentally resemble parts of a Sloka in our book too, though the great number of such passages is rather suspicious. The greatest difficulty however we should incur if we were to point out the prose quotations, though there are certainly such, e.g. I, 3, 1,1, sutta amuzi, muzizo satatam gagaranti. Such phrases differ in style from the rest of the prose part; but it would be impossible to draw the line between them and the work of the real author. From what has been said, it will appear how difficult it is to do justice to such a work as the first book of the A#araiga in the first attempt to translate it. In most cases I have contented myself with rendering the text according to the interpretation of the commentator. It must be left to future labours to come nearer the meaning of the author than it has been preserved by the tradition of the scholiasts. Formerly the first book contained nine lectures instead of eight, one lecture, the Mah4parinn4, being now lost. It was, according to some authorities, Samavay4nga, Nandi, Avasyaka Niryukti, and Vidhiprabha}, the ninth lecture; but according to the Niryukti of the A&4ranga Satra, which contains a systematic exposition of the subjects treated in the single lectures and lessons of the A#4rAnga itself, and 1 See Weber, Indische Studien, XVI, p. 251 seq. [22] d ] GAINA SOTRAS. to Silanka and the other commentators, it was the eighth lecture. It contained seven lessons, and treated of some details of ascetic life?. The fact that the same subjects were treated in the second book probably occasioned the loss of the Mahaparinné, ‘because it was superfluous ®’
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.