2023-02-16 14:47:17 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
INTRODUCTION
33
for each śataka; l. 10-14, let. 35; dated samvat 1844 = A. D. 1787.
W2- Anandāśrama 3062; size 11-1/4" x 5-1/4"; fol. 97, 1, 5-10, let.
36. Bold writing.
W3 = BOR1336[ = 18/1868-9]; size 9-1/4" x 4-7/8"; fol. 64 - 23+23+18;
1. 9-13, let. 40-45. Scribe very careless.
All these contain the text in the center, comment above and below.
Wi DC12080, Telugu characters ou European paper, bound in book
form; 1st 38 folios only, the rest containing other works. Carelessly copied
from a devanagari source, shown by transcriptions like dya for gha, yadıyam
for pattanam, yatpuh for patynḥ.
None of the plentiful emended sources were used for collation, nor
those with inflated vairagya like SVP 155, nor the comparatively rare
inflated niti as in Nagpur 299; the last makes additions both to text and
commentary. The Paris MS is influenced by X and resembles the larger
lithograph editions. The profound but fortuitous influence of this version on
printed editions has been discussed in the prefaco.
Archetype &
This archetype has been edited and published as the previous volume
of this series with much the same critical apparatus as that given below
except Y7. s. The archetype consists of two major versions, which ( particularly
the second) are subdivided much more rigidly into paddhatis than W. The
main purpose-unsuccessful -seems to have been to fix the content at
precisely 300 ślokas. The work is generally entitled the Subhasitaratnavali
or -muktāvali.
višvabrāhma Ya Ch
Version X. Commentator Tuka Brahmananda,
[goldsmith] by caste and profession who wrote in the 17th century; the son of
Nāganātha Karamar, Sivaji's treasurer at Sätara. This information, without
accurate dates but with great detail as to the miracles as necessary for
every Indian literary figure as for Virgil in the middle ages] performed
by Tuka Brahmananda comes from part 1. pp. 70-81 of the Mahäräși ra
Kavicaritra [Bombay 1907] by Jagannath Raghunath Ajgackar. The
commentary is in the form of a Marathi samavṛtta, useful for removing
copyist's errors from the often corrupt Sanskrit text. The commentary is signed
Bhartṛhari-mahāyogi-kṛti…..sambhari / brahmanandem samasloki keli ţikā tukā
mhane //, the gap being filled in by the name of the śataka. This has led
to confusion with other Tukäs of Maharastra, in particular with the saint
Tukārāma, Tukā Vipra, and Tukärāmabābā Varde, though there is nothing
to show that any of them ever translated Bhartrhari. In the name of the
last [a Goa Sarasvat Brahmin of the 16th century], the Marathi samavṛtta
of the N+ V was published at the beginning of the century in the Satsanga
magazine at Kumbhārjuā, Goa [Portuguese India], republished with the S
found in the Satsanga editor's papers as No. 1 the Maharastra Sarasvat
Granthamalā । Bombay, Lakşminarayana Press, 1910]. The order of the
stanzas is changed, some omitted, and identifications of the original
Sanskrit ślokas often wrong in this misleading edition.
5 भ. सु.
a
33
for each śataka; l. 10-14, let. 35; dated samvat 1844 = A. D. 1787.
W2- Anandāśrama 3062; size 11-1/4" x 5-1/4"; fol. 97, 1, 5-10, let.
36. Bold writing.
W3 = BOR1336[ = 18/1868-9]; size 9-1/4" x 4-7/8"; fol. 64 - 23+23+18;
1. 9-13, let. 40-45. Scribe very careless.
All these contain the text in the center, comment above and below.
Wi DC12080, Telugu characters ou European paper, bound in book
form; 1st 38 folios only, the rest containing other works. Carelessly copied
from a devanagari source, shown by transcriptions like dya for gha, yadıyam
for pattanam, yatpuh for patynḥ.
None of the plentiful emended sources were used for collation, nor
those with inflated vairagya like SVP 155, nor the comparatively rare
inflated niti as in Nagpur 299; the last makes additions both to text and
commentary. The Paris MS is influenced by X and resembles the larger
lithograph editions. The profound but fortuitous influence of this version on
printed editions has been discussed in the prefaco.
Archetype &
This archetype has been edited and published as the previous volume
of this series with much the same critical apparatus as that given below
except Y7. s. The archetype consists of two major versions, which ( particularly
the second) are subdivided much more rigidly into paddhatis than W. The
main purpose-unsuccessful -seems to have been to fix the content at
precisely 300 ślokas. The work is generally entitled the Subhasitaratnavali
or -muktāvali.
višvabrāhma Ya Ch
Version X. Commentator Tuka Brahmananda,
[goldsmith] by caste and profession who wrote in the 17th century; the son of
Nāganātha Karamar, Sivaji's treasurer at Sätara. This information, without
accurate dates but with great detail as to the miracles as necessary for
every Indian literary figure as for Virgil in the middle ages] performed
by Tuka Brahmananda comes from part 1. pp. 70-81 of the Mahäräși ra
Kavicaritra [Bombay 1907] by Jagannath Raghunath Ajgackar. The
commentary is in the form of a Marathi samavṛtta, useful for removing
copyist's errors from the often corrupt Sanskrit text. The commentary is signed
Bhartṛhari-mahāyogi-kṛti…..sambhari / brahmanandem samasloki keli ţikā tukā
mhane //, the gap being filled in by the name of the śataka. This has led
to confusion with other Tukäs of Maharastra, in particular with the saint
Tukārāma, Tukā Vipra, and Tukärāmabābā Varde, though there is nothing
to show that any of them ever translated Bhartrhari. In the name of the
last [a Goa Sarasvat Brahmin of the 16th century], the Marathi samavṛtta
of the N+ V was published at the beginning of the century in the Satsanga
magazine at Kumbhārjuā, Goa [Portuguese India], republished with the S
found in the Satsanga editor's papers as No. 1 the Maharastra Sarasvat
Granthamalā । Bombay, Lakşminarayana Press, 1910]. The order of the
stanzas is changed, some omitted, and identifications of the original
Sanskrit ślokas often wrong in this misleading edition.
5 भ. सु.
a