________________
156
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
[MAT, 1886.
The present system, as exhibited in the volume TAY , A t; and refra, maftfar. The now under notice and its predecessor, simply same mistakes occur in the Calcutta Ed. of 1875; serves no practical purpose whatever; and it is but the Bombay Editors have corrected a fourth a pity that Dr. Oppert's time and energy should be mistake of that edition. expended so fruitlessly.
On II. 17 we have the note *** -
J. F. FLERT, rarea - 4r fattat Tr. 23rd March 1886.
Fame T TATTRIC" ft. The Editors have
copied from the Calcutta Ed., but, trying THX KIRATARJUNIYA OF BHARAVI, with the COXIN perhaps to give some sense to the passage, they
TART OF YALLINATHA. Edited with various road- have added a mistake in compounding the two ings by N. B. GODABOLE, B.A., and K. P. PARABA. Printed and published by the proprietor of the words Parafaret of that edition. It should of Nirnaya-Sagara Press. Bombay: 1886.
course have been * FUTETTON " Of the private publishing-firms of Bombay,
केवलं श्रयमाणेव किया निमित्त कारकभावस्थापित none seems more anxious than is the Nirnaya
Tari" fat. . Sagara Press, to furnish the student of Sanskrit
The Commentary on II. 27, as printed in the with clearly printed, well got up, and moderately
Bombay Edition, is a regular mine of mistakes. priced editions of the classical works of Sanskrit
In the first place, a well-known definition has literature. The list of books already brought out
been, with two mistakes, thus copied from the by that press, includes amongst others several
Calcutta Ed.-star works of Kalidasa, the Ratndvali, the Dasakumd
HT racharita, and the Kirdtarjunfya. Other works
RIT: Secondly the interpunctuation of the are in the press; and more are to follow, if
whole passage, in which Mallinatha discusses the sufficient assistance and encouragement be given
compound pfit, shows that the passage bas by the public. The principal editors appear to not been understood; and the words for be Mr. K. T. Paraba, and Mr. N. B. Godabole, | शुक्ल and बलाकायां tor बलाकायाः prove that the B.A., and, if I remember rightly, formerly a Editors have again been copying. And lastly, the Jagannath Shankershet scholar of the Bombay final remark TT TTTE :-"tat off is University. In Europe it is unfortunately some.
T HAT rest Farfor shows, not merely what difficult to get hold of books published in
they have been copying, but also that they have India. But having succeeded in procuring a copy
taken no trouble to understand what they were of the Kirátárjunkya brought out by the Nirnaya..
putting before the public. Had they made any Sågara Press, I consider it right both to the
attempt to do so, they would probably have dispublic and to the enterprising publishers, to
covered that the words a f an of the state plainly what opinion I have arrived at by
Calcutta Ed. stand for qerfrafts, and it an examination of a portion of this Edition.
In few words, it is this, that Messrs. Godabole स्थात् tor बालिझ्यात. and Paraba have given us in this edition' little | Proof of copying may also be afforded by more than a reprint of a Calcutta print;-that, W AT for iraft on II. 20; by the sign of As regards the commentary, they have taken interpunctuation before i t on II. 85; by no great trouble to understand what they have M at for on II. 39; and by other mishanded to their printers ;-and that, for the part takes which have been reprinted. which I have had the patience to study, they do To give the editors their due, I must add that not appear to have consulted a single one of the they have appended to their edition an alphabe. aany MSS. which must have been within reach. tical index of the verses of the Kirdt drjun fya.
A few examples out of many may prove this: On the whole, the first edition of the Kirdidr. On II. 19, in which verse the word TOT occurs, juniya, published at Calcutta in 1814, may be we read the note "T " P ereit Part:. said to be still the best. Many of its mistakes At first, we are inclined to consider Fer må have been repeated, while others have been misprint for me. but when we find the same
added, in the later editions. May we hope that misprint in the Calcutta Edition of 1875, w9
the Superintendents of the Bombay Sanskrit begin to suspect that the Bombay Editors have
Series will arrange to put us in possession of
trustworthy and correct text of MallinAtha's copied. On II. 7 Mallin&tha is made to say "apartara
excellent commentary on a poem which, for many
reasons, is one of the most important and attrac. पर: प्रथमपुरुषेऽप्रबुण्यमानो ऽबस्ति" इतिभाबकारः ।
tive works of the classical literature of India P T u rut . Here there are three
F. KJELHORN mistakes. भवतिपरshould have been भवन्तीपर Göttingen.
