Tenth Report on Search of Hindi Manuscripts for Years 1917 to 1919

SR No.: 010837
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Rai Bahaddur Hiralal
Publisher: Allahabad Government Press
Publication Year: 1929
Total Pages: 532
Language: Hindi
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 38 MB

Page 45

36
APPENDIX I.
This would give Samvat 1874, but the details, viz., 11th of dark fortnight of Agahana falling on a Wednesday correctly work out for the Samvat year, 1844. The 11th of the dark fortnight of Agahana in that year fell on Wednesday, the 21st November, 1787 A.D. It appears that the poet took Udadhi or oceans to be four or the transcriber copied as a as ar gafa under a mistaken idea that the re-duplication of Veda was an error. In the manuscript in hand as was found written as बद and वसु as सव.
No. 61. GANGĀRĀMA wrote Śabda-brahma-jijñāsu a book on religious devotion, the date of the manuscript being 1836 A.D. which shows that the poet flourished at any rate before that year. His composition is meritorious.
No. 62. GAÑJANA TIWĀRI wrote Kangyuddin-khanHulāsa or diversion for Nawab Kainaruddin K in, whom the poet describes as Vazirāzam of the Emperor Muhammad Śáb (1719-1748 A.D.). The original name of Kamaruddin Khān was Mira Muhammad Fāzil. He was appointed minister after the resignation of Asāfjāb. He was killed in the battle of Sirhind in 1748 A.D. while opposing Ahmad Sah Abdāli. This book was noticed before (see no. 65 of S. R. 1903), where the date of composition or its commencement is quoted As Friday Vaibākha Sudi 5 Samvat 1785, which regularly corresponds to Friday, the 3rd May, 1728 A.D. It may be noted here that in that year there was an intercalary month of Vaibākha and that the work was completed at the end of the second Vaigākha. The manuscript under notice was copied on a Sunday, the 13th of Katika Sudi 1785, which again regularly corresponds to Sunday, the 3rd November, 1728 A.D). Thus it would appear that this copy was prepared exactly six months after its composition. The copy was made by one Risabhadāsa Jāyaswāl and not the poet himself, which bespeaks the latter's popularity. The work clearly shows the poet's ability. He is said to be a descendant of a