Bruhat Katha kosha

SR No.: 016060
Original Sutra Author: Harishen Acharya
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1943
Total Pages: 566
Language: Prakrit, Sanskrit
Classification: Dictionary & Dictionary
File Size: 16 MB

Page 34

INTRODUCTION
which perhaps stands for the Granthāgra. Then we have the colophon in red ink: इति श्रीहरिषेणाचार्यकृतबृहत्कथाकोशं समाप्तं । The two letters carrya are covered with black ink possibly by a later copyist who did not like to acknowledge Harişeņa as an Acārya. Then we have in black ink ÉTT 9623 AT AHAHAR THTEYCHTHAUTETTATRIT Parent it. The rest of the writing, covering nearly six lines, has been rubbed with black ink; and the letters can be recognised with great difficulty. Possibly this portion contains for whom the copy was prepared etc. Some names like Surendrakirti and Kşemendrakīrti are seen in that portion. On the upper margin of page 318 we have 'Lambara 1072 which possibly stands for the number of the Ms. in a particular collection.
So far as the Ms. Ja is concerned, the portion which would have mentioned the place of copying is erased with black ink, but we have received this Ms. from Jaipur. The two other Mss. clearly state that they are written at Jaipur. Pha and Ja do not show uniform constitution; their dates consequently indicate the age of the concluding portion only, i. e., pp. 158-377 in Pha and pp. 123-328 in Ta. As the dates are available, Ta was written in Samvat 1833 (-57 = 1776 A. D.), Pa in Samyat 1868 (-57 = 1811 A. D.) and Pha in Samvat 1877 (-57 = 1820 A. D.). The pages 87-122 in Ja look older, and they can be assigned at least 50 years earlier than 1776 A. D. Apart from the form of letters, which is bound to vary from scribe to scribe, the style of writing is nearly alike in these three Mss. Here and there these Mss. add explanatory synonyms on the margin for certain obscure words; and the important ones are recorded by me in the foot-notes. These Mss. show some common orthographical peculiarities : c and v are written alike; the three sibilants are freely confused; in a conjunct group with me as the first member, the other member is necessarily written as a duplicate; visarga is retained when it should have been dropped, and it is at times dropped when it should have been retained; the graphic representation for tk, kt and ktv is almost alike; at times gr is confused with gr, mri with mr, and ? with ri; usually ch is written for cch; bho for bhoh, udyota for uddy sanmukha for sarmukha, hk for $k etc. Some of the words are mutually confounded, for instance, priti and prita, nihita and nihata, prāpya and prāpa, Ujjayani and Ujjayini, asisrayat and asisriyat. Samdhi rules are not regularly observed at the close of Padas.The Ms. Pha sometimes shows j for y.
These three Mss. do not show anything like recensions, but they belong to one and the same family or group. Apart from the form of colophons and the use of yugmam, yugalam or yugalamidam, with which, I think, the copyists have taken slight liberty, the Mss. show quite minor variations among themselves. In the beginning Pa, Pha and Ja show some differences. Later when Pa and Pha differed, Ja agreed, now and then. either with Pa or Pha. But with the change of hand-writing on folio No. 157, i. e. from the verse No. 64 in the story No. 63, Pha begins to show remarkable agreement with Pa almost upto the end. With the story No. 107 onwards all the three Mss. closely agree in various details, and the