Vakrokti Jivita Of Kuntaka

SR No.: 269528
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: K Krishnamoorthy
Publisher: K Krishnamoorthy
Total Pages: 29
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 2 MB

Page 19

-19
descendents of Pandit Kuñj ukrsna Variyar and to exhaust the leads they may be
able to provide.
M2: The transcript of Ml at the Government Oriental Manuscripts Library,
Madras. De and K have used the term "Madras MS." for this.
S. Kuppuswami Sastri,
in his catalogue referred to in the account of Ml above, describes the transcript
as follows:
"R. No. 3332.
Paper. 10 3/4 x 9 3/8 inches.
Foll 114. Lines, 20
in a page. Devanagari. Good. Transcribed in 1920-21 from a MS. of M.R. Ry. Kunjukrsna Vāriyar, Sanskrit Pandit, Zamorin College, Calicut." He then goes on
to give some extracts from the transcript. According to those extracts, the
transcript ends with the phrase upadesinam mahakavi, that is, with the conclusion
of karika 4.26 and the first word of the vrtti thereto (De 1961:245, lines 6-9, K p. 283, lines 2-3). However, De's edition, which had no source other than M2
for this portion of the VJ, extends beyond the phrase by about half a page. So
does K's.
It is obvious, therefore, that the detail regarding the conclusion of
the ms., in Kuppuswami's catalogue is not accurate.
M3: A certified copy of M2 forwarded to De in England in 1920 by the Curator
of the GOML, through the efforts of F.W. Thomas (De 1961:1v). Probably cited by
De, along with M4, as "Ms. A" in the text-critical footnotes to his edition.
M4: A copy of the first two unmesas in the Madras transcript prepared by
Pandit (later Maha-mahopadhyaya) Ananta Krsna sastrī of Calcutta University for
De, on being commissioned in 1922 by Sir Asutosh Mookerjee, the then Vice-chancellor
of Calcutta University. Ananta Krsna Sastri was helped by Pandit Ramakrsna Kavi
who then worked at the GOML.CY De (1961:v) says that this copy threw much light
on some of the inaccuracies of M3 and supplied a "gap of about five pages" in M3. The gap corresponds to p. 72 line 12 - p. 77 line 7 (inclusive) of De's (1961?]
edition. De first thought that the five pages were "left out apparently inadvert
antly." However, when he examined M2 personally in 1924, he noticed that the gap