DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29591#0397
Commentary: Chap. 33—34
393
the Pannavanasutta XVII ed. Calc. p. 483, and ff., and in the
Lokaprakasa ed. Hiralal p. 130 ff., there are long expositions on
the nature of the Lesya’s. Modern literature on this topic, which
is not very abundant, has been quoted in my paper mentioned
above. In two works of the last years, Mr. Id.Warren’s Jainism,
Madras 1912, and HIrachand L. Jhaverl’s First Principles of the
Jain Philosophy, London 1910, I can find absolutely nothing con-
cerning the Lesya’s.
3. The names of the different lesya s are all clear except kciu
and pamha. Instead of these Umasvati Tattvarthas. IV, 2. 7. 23
has dhumra and padma, which is explained as meaning ’rose-
coloured’. Now I suppose this to be a mistake; for Weber Bhag.
p. 317 tells us that pamha -— which is etymologically Skt. paks-
man, Goldschmidt KZ. XXV, 611; Leumann Aup. S. p. 133 sq.;
Pischel § 312 — means the colour of the goldline on the touch-
stone, and of the yellow pistils of the lotus-flower (padmakesara).
Consequently, pamha — paksman simply means ’pistil’ i. e. ’lotus-
pistil’ (paksman really means ’a pistil’ in Sanskrit, BR.) and after-
wards ’lotus-pistil-coloured’i. e. ’whitish yellow’. And padma, which
has perhaps been mistaken for a Sanskrit equivalent of pamha,
simply means the same. As for kdu I am not sure of the ety-
mological derivation of this word. Jacobi SBE. XLV, p. 197 n. 4
thinks it to be kdpota-, and I myself formerly suggested kapila-
or kadrava- as possible relations. I am rather inclined to believe
now that all these suggestions are incorrect, and that kdu- is a
word without any Sanskrit equivalent. Its formation is the same
as that of ciu-, vau-, teu- &c., and there is apparently a related
word in kavl mlavarna Desln. 2, 26, a feminine form of an ad-
jective *kdva- or perhaps kciu-. But I am unable to arrive to
any definite result concerning the etymology of these words.
4. ristaka- is not clear. D. explains it as phalavisesah, and
according to this Jacobi SBE. XLV, p. 197 translates it as ’(the
fruit of) Ristaka (Sapindus detergens). But S., who also knows
this explanation, alternates it with another, viz. risto dronakdkah j
sa eva ristakah |; dronakcika- means ’a raven’, and this seems to
make better sense. However, we have still another word rittha-
or rista-, which means a precious stone, perhaps an emerald.
Khahjana0 Jacobi translates by ’wag-tail’, which is probably
correct, but against the explanations of the commentaries. D.
393
the Pannavanasutta XVII ed. Calc. p. 483, and ff., and in the
Lokaprakasa ed. Hiralal p. 130 ff., there are long expositions on
the nature of the Lesya’s. Modern literature on this topic, which
is not very abundant, has been quoted in my paper mentioned
above. In two works of the last years, Mr. Id.Warren’s Jainism,
Madras 1912, and HIrachand L. Jhaverl’s First Principles of the
Jain Philosophy, London 1910, I can find absolutely nothing con-
cerning the Lesya’s.
3. The names of the different lesya s are all clear except kciu
and pamha. Instead of these Umasvati Tattvarthas. IV, 2. 7. 23
has dhumra and padma, which is explained as meaning ’rose-
coloured’. Now I suppose this to be a mistake; for Weber Bhag.
p. 317 tells us that pamha -— which is etymologically Skt. paks-
man, Goldschmidt KZ. XXV, 611; Leumann Aup. S. p. 133 sq.;
Pischel § 312 — means the colour of the goldline on the touch-
stone, and of the yellow pistils of the lotus-flower (padmakesara).
Consequently, pamha — paksman simply means ’pistil’ i. e. ’lotus-
pistil’ (paksman really means ’a pistil’ in Sanskrit, BR.) and after-
wards ’lotus-pistil-coloured’i. e. ’whitish yellow’. And padma, which
has perhaps been mistaken for a Sanskrit equivalent of pamha,
simply means the same. As for kdu I am not sure of the ety-
mological derivation of this word. Jacobi SBE. XLV, p. 197 n. 4
thinks it to be kdpota-, and I myself formerly suggested kapila-
or kadrava- as possible relations. I am rather inclined to believe
now that all these suggestions are incorrect, and that kdu- is a
word without any Sanskrit equivalent. Its formation is the same
as that of ciu-, vau-, teu- &c., and there is apparently a related
word in kavl mlavarna Desln. 2, 26, a feminine form of an ad-
jective *kdva- or perhaps kciu-. But I am unable to arrive to
any definite result concerning the etymology of these words.
4. ristaka- is not clear. D. explains it as phalavisesah, and
according to this Jacobi SBE. XLV, p. 197 translates it as ’(the
fruit of) Ristaka (Sapindus detergens). But S., who also knows
this explanation, alternates it with another, viz. risto dronakdkah j
sa eva ristakah |; dronakcika- means ’a raven’, and this seems to
make better sense. However, we have still another word rittha-
or rista-, which means a precious stone, perhaps an emerald.
Khahjana0 Jacobi translates by ’wag-tail’, which is probably
correct, but against the explanations of the commentaries. D.