9058009394

184 V. M. KUL KARNI

fergt (? fegt) fe# %g ęfcT iwfalW«ftll<W feg: I p.440

The authors of the ND give this etymology with a slight change:

fegt %g R# : | dqf'IK4 ftg_:, *L$g!dl#tlftft |

This laller part rcminds us of Dhanika’s etymology:

for #Tg 5frt glgggNld'-g|gKcg'-ł>HR feg: I

Avaloka on DR ID (60ab)

20. gr<glggrgftgg |frt| gEgR gRdlf^l frgOłfaFllfrT grir--M>unjri

gu# rwid gRftrgg<«gtd-

-p.445

Ubieli gR# 4Kdlfa$ ftf#

flfrt gg g*>UW(W %fog go# ĆR g^Tg jftgfytMg^ ggfl I 41 gl ffirW<g|g-MglrfRI

-Hema. p.441

‘Prakhyitam' and ‘yattat’ are most probably misreadings of the original readings ‘prakhyite’ and *yatra' preservcd by Hcmacandra. Hemacandra’s rcading ‘tat prakhyitam' is dccidedly better than ‘tatkhyitam’, as it finely contrasts with ‘aprakhyita’ that follows ‘mi bhut’. To a carelul reader it is evident that some word/s is/are missing between ‘striparvavrttintavat’and 'mi bhut’. Luckily for us Hcmacandra has preserved these ‘missing words’:

(g?) gggi 41 gT (^rgytpgHg^HlrfRI)

21. ftfffcdift    gi# arefir    gi# ?rr^r

grfódift gg| --ghfr-M %i    4lf#lft gg|

^tftgTf#gf#raT: I    łjfhPtgldPldf^dWI: I

- p. 446

- Hema . p. 441

It is elear as daylight that Hcmacandra’s reading yyikulaś cestih ( visarga is dropped because of the soft consonant that follows) is the right one.

22.....(?lfgSWH«Hd JPPgtfteglfclT...

gggglftfafflRI gglfo ^ 4TgFg(% gg g f%$(? fOgTgLPglł&gg^ rWT

faŚftoi 41%:    ggTft

gRRg05lf% gfcRI Pt-ŁlriMPł: H<ł>g4K

g^Fg H<plgg: g^gcWoit gg, <T^ g3*4R|

-p.448

gagi : ...(<IHlgviHgggfi44 Ąflrilftgt... ggg^jrf^tfipąi ... sg^-giftfhwgg# gfruft gigggn^r gfeRi fagggft 'foggji gggrg ?rgf%gg: ggir-ftgawiitsgf

gg    gfTR^I

- Hema. p.442

Hemacandra’s readings would strike a careful reader as genuine or authenlic. 23. ^^frhWr^frhshA fsCT*TTUt    gcHT    ^

w<rc-

OTt^lT^H^c5Tr^ 5P1FF(T    ^