Sandesha Rasaka

SR No.: 002918
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Abdul Rahman, Jinvijay, H C Bhayani
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1945
Total Pages: 282
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 17 MB

Page 38

PREFACE
(nine some space is left empty at the end of each stanza. This possibly means that as in other Mss., here also, the copyist intended to write the numbers with red ink or vermilion, but due to some reason it was left undone.
To give some idea of the size, characters etc. of these three Mss., a half-tone block of one page of each Ms. is given herewith.
I have sought to record at the base of the text of the Rāsaka the variant readings that are found in these three Mss. One who examines these variants will see that the text of the Rāsaka has come down to us with plenty of variants. The spelling and pronunciation in a spoken vernacular is subject to continual change dependent upon its currency in different places at different times and among different peoples. The work which becomes more popular and current, gathers still richer crop of variants. It is difficult to decide which one of the Mss. offering numerous variants is more correct and faithful to the original. If the author's date is definitely known, we can say that the Ms. which is written nearer to this date is more reliable. But when the author's date is indefinite, we cannot take it as a never-failing criterion that the earliest Ms. is the most reliable one. For a later Ms. can prove more authentic than an earlier one, if the former is copied from a prototype which is earlier than the latter. In such circumstances it is a very difficult task to constitute an authentic text of a work which abounds in variants. To illutrate this let us suppose here are two Mss. of a vernacular work composed in the 11th century. One of these is written in the 15th century and presents that form of language which, after successive transformations was current in that century. On the other hand the other Ms. is written in the 18th century, but as it is an exact reproduction of its prototype which belonged to the 18th century, we should consider this latter Ms, more authentic when we want to study the language of that work. I have many a time come across such cases during my researches.
But when we have no definite idea as to the time of the author, nor can we find any sure ground to fix the tradition of the Mss, the obviously least objectionable course would be to accept the majority reading in the constituted text and record