________________
大程
Vyavaharakanda
(16) The writers of treatises have made minute sub-divisions while classifying the subject-matter of the Smriti-texts. We have not adopted them; for the texts, being thus separated under sub-divisions, far being classified render it impossible to follow the main purpose or the argument of the Smriti writer.
(17) For all the texts quoted, the foot-notes contain full references to the use made of them by writers of treatises.
(18) All readings which appear to be preferable or authentic from the philological or historical point of view have been incorporated in the original texts quoted, and the readings that were thought to be of the same worth or inferior have been given in brackets in the foot-notes. Most of the variants are those that have been adopted by the various treatise-writers. In some cases the variants may be due either to mistakes of scribes or to multiplicity of scribes; in the section on for instance, the verses, bearing on the 18 divisions in बृहस्पति as quoted in theपराशरमाधव, contain the reading "एवं सम्यक् समुत्थानं पदानि च चतुर्दश', where एवं सम्यक् समुत्थानं makes no sense and yet the reading has been adopted in his edition by so careful an editor as इस्लामपूरकर. The स्मृतिचन्द्रिका reads “एतान्यर्थसमुस्थानि and it gives a meaning which is quite suitable in the context.
(19) The commentary portion on the various texts must be read with due regard to readings in the foot-notes; for the commentary does not necessarily adopt the reading adopted. by us
Explanation of the conventions
adopted in the foot-notes. Instructions for the use of the v. l.
(1) The texts quoted in the EIUS have been printed in black. The commentaries have been printed below in smaller type. In the foot-notes after the texts proper, the commentaries which contain the same matter as others quoted
in the text have been referred to by various signs such as, +, x; then follow references to the text and the v. 1. The corrupt readings from the Bhasya of Medha tithi come next and have been indicated by means of figures.
(2) Abbreviations for the different words quoted such as the Vedas, the Sutras, the Smritis, the Purāņas, the treatises etc, have been printed in black; references to chapters and verses. and the v. 1. having been printed in small type ; e. g. नासं. १०२ ष्याणां (ष्येषु) etc.. (p. 4).
(3) References to texts from the Vedas, the Sutras, the Smritis and the Purāņas are given by the universally accepted method. The treatises have been referred to by the page.
(4) Only the portion of text for which a v. 1. exists has been first given and then the v. 1. follows itself within brackets...
(5) No v. 1. from Mss. which is obviously grammatically incorrect has been quoted. The same rule has been adopted in most cases for printed books. But a v. 1. in works edited by learned scholars have been quoted even when they were found to be incorrect.
(6) When there exists a v. 1. for a complete stanza or a complete hemistich it has been quoted without repeating the portion for which it stands
(7) When a portion is missing in a particular work, after the name of the work the portion is mentioned in brackets and the sign o is marked after the portion to show that it is missing; likewise when a portion is added in a work it is mention ed in brackets with the sign + before the brackets, eg वा शाखविद अवचने (अन्यथावचने)
ed c
(8) All works are cited chronologically for purposes of their references, to the v. l. in the foot-notes. When a later work has the same reading as an earlier work or has some portion which is com
