________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
vii
MSS., though, as I have already pointed out, it is probable that it represents a genuine version of Haradatta's commentary on that portion of the sútra.
I have followed Haradatta's commentary in dividing the section into sútras, as it was according to it that references were given in my edition of the Gșihya-sútra. This division occassionally varies from the one adopted by Kapardisvámin; but the differences are few and can be easily made out from the commentaries as arranged here.
It is also to be observed that in all my manuscripts of the two commentaries the section is divided into four subsections called khandas, whereas neither in the Calcutta Edition nor in Prof. Max Müller's translation the division into khandas has been adopted. The principle on which this division is based, in this or in other Kalpa-sútras of Vedic literature, is yet to be discovered. The existence of such a division in my MSS. only shows that the sútra has been a common subject of study among the South Indian Bráhmans.
In explaining and illustrating the sútras, both the commentaries refer to Vedic passages and sútras from all sákhás. A large majority, occurring in the Taittiriya-śákhá, have been traced to their sources and corrected where the MSS. went wrong. As regards those from other sákhás, a few of which have not been traced to their lair, the passages and sútras have been given as they are found in the MSS.
The nature of the work and the scantiness of the materials rendered the task of editing rather difficult. With the help, however, of Panditaratnam K. Rangáchárya, my Sanskrit Assistant, I have been able to make my way through the intricacies of the commentaries and the inaccuracies of the MSS.
MYSORE,
}
A. MAHADEVA S'A'STRI.
September 1893,
For Private and Personal Use Only