________________
214
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
more suitable than that of Mr. Arthur Venis on which I relied.
SOLECISMS OF SAMKARACHARYA AND KALIDASA, fenst: ewol
(
the
any sms. Yet flowing forms which
B
with the two preceding ones, and that instead instead of the very begin
THE Sanskrit language of Sarkaracharya, the founder of the Advaita school, is considered to be so chaste and idiomatic that it is inconceivable, nay that has committed 622 occur in his gloss on the Chhandogya Upanishad cannot, I am afraid, be defended by any rules of grammar. Thus in his ooniment on Adhy ya I, Rik-simasi mdiyandariabiiinne. Acaording to Rkmini Khanda, vd, Samkarbharya saya Yatha-cha V. 4. 77. instead of Rik-sinmajni we should here have Bik-same. Similarly in his Bhashya, o VIII, K. 8, v. 4, he was the form gachchheyatam gachchhetam. Lastly, the matical form marishye occurs at begramning of his gloss on 4. VIII, K. 12, v. 9, which is prohibited by and ought to have been marishgami in accordance with Panini E 8 61 These solecisms are by no means surprising when they are found even in the composition of the most renowned poet, Kalidasa. Thus in Kumarasambhava I. 35 and Raghu vaméa XIV, 23, the foam dea is used, which is not justified by Papini II. 4, 52. Similarly, in Raghu-vamia V. 34; V. 61, XIX. 50, the forms fagmwvän, fathivan and Kamayana have been employed by him which cannot be correct according to Panimi 111. 2,7107 and III. 1, 90, nabvi venditial posto mon sare so sorge outil a D koBHANDARKAR
novidades
I must join issue, however, with my learned critic in regard to his remarks in connection with thea. In explaining it I quoted a passage from the Bib. Ind. edition o of Bhamati part of which stands thus :- यदि पुनरेत एव सुखदुःखस्वभावा भवेयुस्ततः स्वरूपत्वाद्धेमन्तेऽपि चन्दनः सुखः स्यात् । न हि चन्दनः काचिदचन्दनः । तथा निदाघेष्वपि कुंकुमपंकः सुखो भवेत् । न TET चिदकुंकुमपकः । एवं कण्टकः क्रमेलकस्य मुख इति | मनुष्यादीनामपि प्राणभृतां सुखः स्यात् । न ह्यसौः कांश्चित्प्रत्येव कण्टक इति ॥ Now is it not at once apparent that the final clause is out of harmony
कण्डकः we need either भकण्टकः or the alternative negative expression? One's critical instinct demanded such a reading, and I candidly admit that, on my own authority, but not "in the fashion of the uncritical Indian scribe," I adopted the former of the two, and notified the same in a footnote. But what about the MSS ? Do they bear me out in this? The Professor tells us that, in place of the : of the Bib. Ind. edition, the
College MSS. read sreamzan, whilst the ot the Asiatic Society have प्रति न कण्टकः. Of the four in the India Office Library, one has the former, and two have the latter, of the above readings; whilst the remaining one (No. 1879, comprising the text of the Kalpataru as well as that of the Bhamati) supports the printed text. The negative form of the expression may, therefore, be confidently accepted as the right one, and the Professor himself approves of that found in the College MSS. Why, then, does he regard my alteration as "uncalled for"? It is true that the particle should have been eliminated, but that is a comparatively small matter.
I fear that I may have no opportunity of utiliz ing the useful material now placed at my disposal, since there is little likelihood of a demand for a third edition of the Similes during my lifetime;" moreover, at the age of 72 one must prepare to quit the field altogether. I hope, however, that I have aroused interest in this much-neglected, but fascinating, branch of study, and that younger. men may be led to take it up. aff ushles G. A. JACOB.
[SEPTEMBER 1912.
A GUPTA-VAKATAKA COPPERPLATE GRANT TRASO TER SVG antes, ampal
129
I HAVE lately discovered an interesting copperplate grant. It consists of 2 plates, each plate of the grant resemble those of thearly Gupt being inscribed on one side only. The characters Inscriptions. The legend on the seal reads thus to seorang ni rad of bed at (600. agar Art खाकादक ललामस्य bed blur ndar dolकम प्राप्तः नृपः श्रियः । saice & dowo to actonely be as t ai pievolvery wi-figurai Langer i elimi The genealogy of the Guptas given in the grant is as follows daddance par
Gaptadirajadeiro? olieha hot! 2. St-Ghatotkachova 1 8. Maharaja Sri Chandragupta Ind de mo Maharajadhiraja S-Samudragupta 5. Marija Bet-Chandragupta 1
ed 20
18 bao ng2 1
bate plode
