मधुराविजयम् /111
This page has been fully proofread once and needs a second look.
the commentator follows not only the method of Mallinatha but
that of the other earlier commentators like Arunagirinatha.
Modern methods of research too have not been ignored. Similar
usages of the earlier writers have been presented many a time to
justify the text, to illumine a passage, or to point out some beauty
or other.
The verse 7.16 presents the description of the secting sun.
There is a double entendre involving the sun and the birds.
In such a context the second half offers a difficulty. The com-
mentator unravels the problem by bringing in a story from
Brahma Purana. Thereby we are led to grasp one more aspect
of the poetess. We wish to draw the attention of the readers
to the commentary on 1.4, 21, 44, 58; 2.29, 33; 3.7; 4.49; 5.50,
54, 66; 7.29, 45; and 9.30, 37.
The work has been printed in the past in a highly corrupt
manner. Now for the first time we are having a decent and
correct text, thanks to the labours of the present editor and
commentator. Thereby we are led to graps one more aspect
of the poetess. We wish to draw the attention of the readers
to the commentary on 1.4, 21, 44, 58; 2.29, 33; 3.7; 4.49; 5.50,
54, 66; 7.29, 45; and 9.30, 37.
The work has been printed in th past in a highly corrupt
manner. Now for the first time we are having a decent and
correct text, thanks to the labours of the present editor and
commentator. The commentator has successfully amended the
text, offered correct readings, and completed some verses where
there are gaps. Some of the faulty and doubtful readings allowed
byt he earlier editors of Trivandrum are now corrected. Thus
he gives readings like 'स्तृणु गाम्' (8.31) and explains them grammati-
cally and lexically. Some of the passages in an earlier edition
were stated to be of doubtful validity. The present editor has
successfully defended some of these. In addition to this 'वैइयासक'
(1. 6) ‘प्रपञ्चान्’ (2.7), 'प्रेषित' (2.18 ) 'कलावपि' (2.29) 'मध्यताम्' (39)
'वेदण्ड' (4. 59 ), 'वारुणास्त्र' ( 6:55) and the like are some of the valid
corrections made by the editor. The correctness of some forms
has been examined by the editor minutely and in many cases he
that of the other earlier commentators like Arunagirinatha.
Modern methods of research too have not been ignored. Similar
usages of the earlier writers have been presented many a time to
justify the text, to illumine a passage, or to point out some beauty
or other.
The verse 7.16 presents the description of the secting sun.
There is a double entendre involving the sun and the birds.
In such a context the second half offers a difficulty. The com-
mentator unravels the problem by bringing in a story from
Brahma Purana. Thereby we are led to grasp one more aspect
of the poetess. We wish to draw the attention of the readers
to the commentary on 1.4, 21, 44, 58; 2.29, 33; 3.7; 4.49; 5.50,
54, 66; 7.29, 45; and 9.30, 37.
The work has been printed in the past in a highly corrupt
manner. Now for the first time we are having a decent and
correct text, thanks to the labours of the present editor and
commentator. Thereby we are led to graps one more aspect
of the poetess. We wish to draw the attention of the readers
to the commentary on 1.4, 21, 44, 58; 2.29, 33; 3.7; 4.49; 5.50,
54, 66; 7.29, 45; and 9.30, 37.
The work has been printed in th past in a highly corrupt
manner. Now for the first time we are having a decent and
correct text, thanks to the labours of the present editor and
commentator. The commentator has successfully amended the
text, offered correct readings, and completed some verses where
there are gaps. Some of the faulty and doubtful readings allowed
byt he earlier editors of Trivandrum are now corrected. Thus
he gives readings like 'स्तृणु गाम्' (8.31) and explains them grammati-
cally and lexically. Some of the passages in an earlier edition
were stated to be of doubtful validity. The present editor has
successfully defended some of these. In addition to this 'वैइयासक'
(1. 6) ‘प्रपञ्चान्’ (2.7), 'प्रेषित' (2.18 ) 'कलावपि' (2.29) 'मध्यताम्' (39)
'वेदण्ड' (4. 59 ), 'वारुणास्त्र' ( 6:55) and the like are some of the valid
corrections made by the editor. The correctness of some forms
has been examined by the editor minutely and in many cases he