पृष्ठ:पउमचरिउ.djvu/८५

PAUMACARIU moha and sudhiya-deha in the stanza correctly. Works on Padma- carita and Harivarśa in Jain literature usually have a beginning in which it is declared that the accounts of Rama and Krsna given in non-Jain traditions are false and misleading and so śrenika requests Gautama to narrate these Caritas in their correct ver- sion--that is known to the Jain tradition. Thus we find in Svayam- bhu's Paümacariu: paramesara para-säsaņehim, suvvai vivareri kahi jiņa-sasane kema thiya, kaha Rāhava-keri || jage loehim dhakkarivantaehim, uppāiu bhantiu bhantaehim (1 9 9-1 10 1) "The narrative of Rāghava, O Great Lord, is heard in other faiths in a topsy-turvy form. (Hence) tell (us) how is it found in the Jain faith. Deluded people in the world have fabricated (many) delusions (regarding this narrative)." Similarly Svayambhū describes his Harivamsa narrative as sa-sarcaya-parasamaya-viyāra-sahā 'capable of considering (the accounts current in iny) own faith and (those current in) others'.' The word used in PC. is bhanti, Sk. Bhranti. It is synonymous with moha in the expression Harivarśa-moha-harane occurring in the stanza under discussion. Accordingly it means 'in removing the deluded notions (or erroneous views) regarding the Harivamsa (narrative)'. Agrain, sudhiya means brānta (Dešināmamālā VIII 36), thakā hun (PSM.) 'exhausted'. So sudhiya-dcha means 'exhausted in body': The whole stanza can be rendered as, "Having composed the Paümacariu and the Suddhyacariu replete with merits, (my) Muse (Sarassai) in removing the deluded view about the Hari- vamsa narrative, has become as it were exhausted in body”. In the sense in which the stanza is understood by Jain we fail to see how Svayambhū can say, when most of RC: was actually com- posed, that he proceeds to compose the Harivañía. Similarly Premi's interpretation too has to contend with serious difficulties. Firstly we have to understand Poämacariu in the sense of 'Supple- ment to the Païmacariu' even though Tribhuvana makes it a point to refer to his contribution to PC. with the special name of Paüma- rariyasesa'. Secondly, it would be inconceivable that Tribhuvana who holds his father in great respect and who is never tired in showering omcomiums on him, would describe his proposed addi- tions to RC. as 'designed to remove wrong notions about the Hari- varśa', for it would imply indirect censure of his father's perform- ance Lastly Tribhuvana's confession of his inspiration waning when he undertook to supplement the Harivañíapurana would be something unusual for him in the face of his pronounced tendency to emphasize his nobility in shouldering the highly responsible task of bringing to completion his father's work and in continuing the poctic tradition of his family. Therefore it is more natural and sensible to take the stanza to have been written by Svayambhū himself. After completing 99 Sandhis of RC. Svayambhū says that with the blessings of Sarasvati he has already completed the two works, the Paümacariu and the Suddhayacariu. But as he pro- ceeded with the composition of the Harivarśa that was intended to dispel false versions, his poetic inspiration did not remain sus- tained. Already in the introduction to RC. Svayambhū talks of his (1) Appendix I. Stanzas 19-22. 24-25, 27-28, 30-33, 31-36, 38-39, 53.