Operation In Search of Sanskrit Manuscripts in Mumbai Circle 1

SR No.: 007578
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: P Piterson
Publisher: Royal Asiatic Society
Publication Year: 1883
Total Pages: 275
Language: English
Classification: Book_English & Catalogue
File Size: 115 MB

Page 29

16
OPERATIONS IN SEARCH OF SANSKRIT M98.
एवं रुद्रटकाव्यालंकृतिटिप्पनकविरचनात् पुण्यं ॥ यदवापि मया तस्मात्स नः परोपकृतिकृड्यात् ॥१॥ थारामद्रपुरीयगच्छतिलकापांडित्यसीमाभवत् सूरिभूरिगुणैकमंदिरमिह श्रीशालिभद्राभिधः ॥ तत्पादांबुजषट्पदेन नमिता संक्षेपसंप्रेक्षिणः
सो मग्धाधयाधिकृत्य रचितं सहिपनं लघ्वदः॥२॥ यदनवबोधाद्वितथं विवृतं किमपीह तन्महामतिभिः॥ संशोधनीयमाखिलं रचितांजलिरष याचेऽहं ॥३॥ सहस्रत्रयमन्यूनं ग्रंथोयं पंपिं] डितोऽखिलः॥ द्वात्रिंशदक्षरश्लोकप्रमाणेन सुनिश्चितं ॥४॥ पंचविंशतिसंयुक्तैरेकादशसमा शतैः॥ विक्रमात्समतिक्रांतैः प्रावृषादं समर्थितं ॥ ५॥ मूलसूत्रव्यतिरेकेण मूलसूबेतु सप्तशतान्यशीत्यधिकानि ॥ ६ ॥
__ श्रीकृष्णायनमः भक्तिः कृष्णे मतिर्द्ध शक्तिस्त्यागे रतिःश्रुते ॥ दया सर्वेषु भूतेषु स्यान्मे जन्मनि जन्मनि ॥ १॥ सत्यं मनोरमा कामाः सत्यं रम्पा विभूतयः ।।
किंतु मत्तांगनापांगभंगि लोलं हि जीवितम् ॥२॥ Below this the scribe gives a date Samrat 1190%=A. D. 1134, which we may take to be the date of the manuscript from which he was copying.
It is evident from this colophon, if the reading be accepted, that the date assigned to Rudrata by Bihler,*-A. D. 1050-1100-will have to be revised. Nami, 'a bee that sucked honey from the lotus feet of ári Salibhadra, the ornament of the gachchha of the city of Thârâpadra,' wrote his commentary when eleven hundred and twenty-five years had passed from Vikrama (A. D. 1069).+ Moreover, he wrote it for men of feeble intellect, ever on the look-out for
* "In the latter half of the eleventh century falls Rudrata, the author of the Kavyalamkara. . . . . Rudrata's timo is fixed by the fact that Buyyaka, who wroto in the beginning of the 12th century, quotes him."Kashmir Report, p. 67. It will be seen that there is nothing inconsistent in Bühler's argument with the revised date now sought to be assigned to our author
+ The colophon of the palm-leaf MS. would appear to read shatsaptatisamyuktaih for our pañchavitsatisamyuktaiḥ : but this must be a mistake, as shatsaptatisamyuktaih does not scan. I am not able to refer to the Poona MS. as it has gone, with others, to Prof. Pischel to be catalogued : but Ramachandra Sastri, who deciphered the extracts from the palm-leaf MSS., seems to think it most probable that he has himself made a mistake hero.