Lilavai

SR No.: 002796
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1966
Total Pages: 500
Language: Sanskrit, Hindi, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 15 MB

Page 39

LILAVAI
the Devanagari symbols (y and ) are only long. Wherever the short value was required in Prakrits, the Mss. often use i for e and u for o. By introducing fresh Devanagari symbols for short e and ŏ the problem can be easily solved, and the trouble of recording various readings of i or e, u or o would be saved to a certain extent. Pischel has regularly used ĕ and ŏ in his Grammatik, but that is in transliteration. So far as short è was concerned, Jacobi has used an obverse ч, i. e., P, when it stood metrically short, in his edition of the Samaraiccakahā. Almost following in their footsteps and keeping myself faithful to the documentary evidence, I have used the following symbols with specific values: P, is used when some MSS. write and some ; a, is used when some MSS. write and some ; and in both these cases the actual readings are not recorded. The agreement of the three MSS., whether they writei or e in a particular case, is accepted without any hesitation; but if all the MSS. ready, or and if it is required to be metrically short, I have added a curve () on the head of it. Thus the documentary evidence is kept in tact and the violation of metre is avoided.
९
12
The foot-notes record primarily two items: all the marginal glosses found in the MS. P and the important readings of P, J and B. The former are mostly Sanskrit synonyms and explanations of difficult words in the text, so they are added after a sign of equation, their source being necessarily P. As a rule they are copied as they are: in a few cases omissions and emendations are added in square brackets. In the case of P and J quite apparent scribal errors are silently passed over without being recorded. I am sure, no useful reading is left unnoticed. The MS. B, however, is a very unsatisfactory copy, bristling with scribal lapses; so only such readings from it are recorded as show material difference or have a confirmatory value for one or the other of the two MSS. I have always seen whether they are grammatically probable and are so recorded or interpreted by the Sanskrit commentary found in B. Emendations had to be offered on the readings of B, and they are shown in square brackets.
It has to be remembered that P alone is a satisfactory and complete copy, J stands only for a number of readings which are variants on P, and is an unsatisfactory transcript. The entire copy of J is not before me; so when the reading of P alone is noted, without any variant of J, it means that P and J agree. Generally the variants from the accepted readings alone are noted. But whenever minor adjustaments were involved and it was felt necessary to show clearly the readings of different MSS., at