Chand Drushti Se Dashashrut Skandha Niryukti Path Nirdharan

This document, "Chand Drushti se Dashashrut Skandha Niryukti Path Nirdharan" by Ashok Kumar Singh, is a scholarly analysis of the Dashashrut Skandha Niryukti (D.N.), a significant Jain text. The core of the research revolves around determining the authentic text of the Niryukti, particularly focusing on the gāthā (verse) count and the metrical structure (chandas) of these verses.

The author begins by addressing the discrepancies in the gāthā count of the D.N. across different published editions and scholarly opinions. He notes that the Bhavnagar edition (1954) lists 141 gāthās, while the Lakhabaaval edition (1989) lists 142. However, Singh argues that the Lakhabaaval edition also contains 141 gāthās, with a numbering error (skipping number 111) leading to the higher count. He suggests the Lakhabaaval text is likely derived from the Bhavnagar edition.

Further, the author discusses the much higher gāthā counts (154 and 144) provided by H.R. Kapadia in various publications. Singh meticulously analyzes Kapadia's details, concluding that the 154 count is likely a typographical error and that the intended count, based on the breakdown of verses in different sections, is 144. He explains that a significant portion of this discrepancy (144 vs. 141) arises from the fifth study (adhyayana) of the Niryukti, where the Bhavnagar edition has one fewer gāthā.

A significant portion of the analysis is dedicated to comparing the D.N. with the Nishitha Sutra Bhashya and Churni (N.B.Ch.). The author identifies several gāthās from the N.B.Ch. that are quoted within the D.N., often with slight variations or additional verses not present in the D.N. itself. This comparison is crucial for textual reconstruction and understanding potential influences and borrowings between these texts. Singh highlights specific gāthās from the N.B.Ch. that appear to be missing or are presented differently in the D.N., suggesting that these might have been integral parts of the original D.N.. He also notes that in some instances, a single gāthā in the D.N. seems to correspond to multiple gāthās in the N.B.Ch., or vice versa.

The latter part of the document shifts to a detailed examination of the chandas (meter) used in the D.N.. Singh states that the D.N. is primarily composed in the "Gatha" meter, a Prakrit metric verse that is similar to the Sanskrit "Arya." He explains the characteristics of the Gatha meter, including its typical syllable count (57) and variations thereof.

Singh then categorizes the gāthās in the D.N. based on their metrical adherence:

• Metrically sound (nirḍoṣa): 44 gāthās that perfectly adhere to Gatha meter.
• Minor metrical corrections:
  • 10 gāthās that become metrically sound by treating the final guru (long) vowel of a charana (metrical foot) as hrasva (short).
  • 16 gāthās that become metrically sound by treating the final laghu (short) vowel of a charana as guru.
  • 12 gāthās that become metrically sound by adding an anusvara (nasalization) according to Prakrit grammar rules.
  • 11 gāthās that become metrically sound by adjusting vowel length (shortening a long vowel or lengthening a short one).
  • 18 gāthās that require the addition of nipātas (particles like tu, to, hi, etc.) to fulfill the metrical structure.

This analysis reveals that a significant majority (113 out of 141) of the gāthās are metrically sound with minor corrections.

The remaining 26 gāthās are analyzed further by comparing them with parallel versions found in other texts (like the Daśāśrutaskandha Churni, Nishitha Bhashya, Sthānāṅga, etc.). This comparative textual analysis helps in identifying potential scribal errors or intended variations that affect the meter. Singh provides a table detailing these gāthās, the proposed corrections, and the source texts supporting these corrections. These corrections often involve adding or changing single letters or words to make the meter fit.

The author also notes that even metrically sound gāthās can have variations in meter and text across different manuscripts and texts. He uses the example of a particular gāthā that appears in four different metrical forms in various texts, suggesting that textual variations are not always due to errors but can also be the result of the author's or editor's intentions.

In conclusion, Singh argues against the notion that ancient Jain scholars neglected metrical and grammatical rules in their compositions. He posits that many observed "inaccuracies" are likely due to errors in manuscript copying, editing, or printing, although he concedes that some minor negligence on the part of the niyukti composer might exist. The study emphasizes the importance of metrical analysis in the critical study of ancient Jain texts for accurate textual reconstruction and interpretation.