Reviews Of Diffeent Books

SR No.: 269555
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ashok Aklujkar
Publisher: Ashok Aklujkar
Total Pages: 7
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 2 MB

Page 5

.148
REVIEWS
REVIEWS
149
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 inadvertantly." However, when he examined M2 personally in 1924, he noticed that the gap existed in M2. He could not find out from what source Kavi supplied it. M4, along with M3, seems to have been cited by De as "Ms. A" in the text-critical footnotes of his edition.
MS: A transcript of M2 deposited at the Adyar Library and Research Centre under the number TR 398.
M6: Transcript of a part of MS received (and probably possessed) by K from the Adyar Library, Madras. Covers the third and fourth unmesas.
EDITIONS
of the Peripatetic Party of the Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Medras, during the years 1916-17, 1918-19. Sometime prior to 1925, Pandit Ramakrsna Kavi informed De that Ml was discovered, by the travelling pandits of the Peripatetic Party. "in the possession of an adhyapaka who was apparently unwilling to part with it." In a letter dated February 25, 1925, Kavi informed De further as follows: "the owner of the Ms. is printing his edition of the same work-Vconsisting of five unmegas. He has the advantage of having taught the work several times to his pupils when the MS was in perfoct condition, and he is capable of reciting the whole work from memory. His edition may appear in a short time." When De visited the GOML. in 1924, the information contained (or which was to be contained in 1925?) in Kavi's letter was confirmed by the pandits of that Library (De does not specify the extent of confirmation). The additional detail he learned was that M1 was discovered somewhere on the Malabar coast (De 1961.vi-vii). This makes it very probable that the ms. was in some old Malayalam or Grantha script and consisted of palm-leaves, K (p. IX) is, however, convinced that this is the caso: "the original Malayalam palm-leaf Manuscript has been irrecoverably lost."
K (pp. X-XI) further observes that S. Kuppuswami Sastri in his review of De's 1928 edition (review published in the Journal of Oriental Research, Madras, 1929, pp. 102-105) wrote about how it was he (Kuppuswami Sastri) who discovered the VJ text "through a peripatetic party and announced its discovery in 1920 in his Report of the Working of the Peripatetic Party...."
As some of the phrases in the above collection of information indicate, much has been written about this ms, with a tone of uncertainty. I have also heard scholars speak about it as if the exact location of its discovery was not recorded as if it was a mysterious find somewhere in the wilderness of Malabar and is unlikely to be recovered unless the area is combed again for mss. Few, if any, seem to have noticed or noted that in Volume IV - Part 1, Sanskrit B, p. 4964, of A Triennial Catalogue of Manuscripts Collected during the Triennium 1919-20 to 1921-22 for the Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras, edited by S. Kuppuswami Sastri (Madras: Superintendent, Government Press, 1927), location of the discovery is given with the phrase "M. R. Ry Kunjukrsna Väriyar, Sanskrit Pandit, Zamorin College, Calicut." It is true that the present whereabouts of the manuscript are not known and there is uncertainty about its very survival. However, it does not seem justified to proceed (or rest) on the assumption that nothing short of an ambitious manuscript hunt in the Malabar area will bring the manuscript to light again. An attempt should initially be made to locate the descendents of Pandit Kunjukrona Viriyar and to exhaust the leads they may be able to provide.
M2: The transcript of M1 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 M1 above, describes the transcript as follows: "R. No. 3332. Paper. 10 3/4 X 93/8 inches. Foll 114. Lines, 20 in a page. Devanagari. Good. Transcribed in 1920-21 from a MS. of M. R. Ry. Kujukese Váriyar, 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 upadefina mahakavi, that is, with the conclusion of karika 4.26 and the first word of the vil thereto (De 1961:245, lines 6-9, Kp. 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.lv). Probably cited by De, along with M4, as "Ms. All in the text-critical footnotes to his edition.
M4: A copy of the first two unmess in the Madras transcript prepared by Pandit later Maha-mahopadhyaya) Ananta Krsna Sastri of Calcutta University for De, on being commis sioned 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. 21 De (1961 :v) says that this copy threw much light on some of the inaccuracies of M3 and
(1) The Vakrokrijfvita... by Rajdnaka Kuntala with his own commentary. (Chapters I and IT). Edited with critical notes and introduction by Sushil Kumar De... xlviii, 120. Calcutta: N. C. Paul, 1923. Calcutta Oriental Series, 8.22
(2) Edited and published by Sushil Kumar De. The place of publication probably the same as for 1 above.23 1928. Contents: first two un mesas and that part of the third unmesa which was available in the transcripts of both the Jaisalmer manuscript (J1 above) and the Madras transcript (M2). The fourth unmesa and the remaining part of the third unmesa were published in the appendix of this edition only as far as they were intelligible in De's transcript of the Madras transcript. According to K (p. IX), an appendix in this edition contains De's afterthoughts regarding several readings.
(3) Vakroktijlvita of Kuntaka. Edited by Sushil Kumar De. Calcutta: Firma K. L. Mukhopadhyaya. 1961. Contents: Essentially the same as in 2. Some readings changed and information added. However, K (p. IX) thinks that this edition is such a mechanical reprint of the 1928 edition that the suggestions noted in the appendix of the 1928 edition are also not fully carried out and it contains several misprints though there is no errata."
(4) Hindi Vakroktilvita. Edited with a Hindi commentary by Acarya Visvešvara Siddhantasiromani. Introduction (Bhumika in Hindi) by Dr. Nagendra. Delhi 6, Kashmiri Gate: Atmaram and Sons for the Hindi Anusandhāna Parisd Grantha-malá of the University of Delhi. 1955. Contents: same as in De's 1928 edition with an attempt, apparently not based on any manuscripts, to supply the missing portions of unmeşas 3 and 4. Visvešvara claims to have corrected several errors in De. However, he adds misprints (cf. K p. XI). Conjectural cmendaHons of this edition have been denounced in edition 5.
(5) Hindr Vakrokrywita or frimad-radnaka-kuntaka-viracitar wakrokil-vitam sarippard. prakita-hindi-vyakhyopetam or Vakroktivita of Rajanaka Kuntaka edited with the 'Praksa Hindi commentary by Sri Radheśyama Miśra. Varanasi: The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office. 1967. Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, no. 180. Contents: same as in De's 1928 and 1961 editions. Errors of Acarya Visvešvara, commentator and editor of 4, are pointed out.
(6) Rajanakakuntaka viracita vakrokti.fivitam, or Vakrokriivita of Rafanaka Kuntaka. Chapters I and II, or fri madralna kakuntaka viracitar vakrokriivitam prathama-dviriya un mesa hindi vyakhya anu näda tatha samiksatmaka bhumika sahita. Edited and translated by Dasaratha Dvivedi. Varanasi: Visvavidyalaya Prakasana. 1977. Contents: First two unmesas. Another part containing the third and fourth un menas is contemplated by the editor-translator.
University of British Columbia
ASHOK AKLUJKAR
Asutosh Mookeristri of Calcutta 11
NOTES Title on the dust jacket: VAKROKTIJIVITA OF KUNTAKA A complete edition of Sanskrit Text on literary criticism with improved readinus, a complete English translation and Introduction. Title on p. 1: THE VAKROKTIIVITA OF KUNTAKA Critically edited with
Krana Sastri