________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
PREFACE.
xvii
(4) B: a Grantha manuscript, belonging to the India Office, which only contains the text. It omits verses 1, 2, 11-14. Its date is not stated, but it is probably about two centuries old. It is tolerably correct. It is described in Burnell's small Catalogue, pp. 5-6, where 14 verses from it are printed.
(5) W2, containing the text only, is tolerably correct; only the old irregular ones are in this MS. almost always corrected so as to have the regular form of the classical anushtubh. The introduction, with the exception of the third verse, is wanting. Two verses and a half are also omitted from the main part of the work. This MS. has already been partly described.
(6) I 4, a MS. belonging to the India Office, containing the text only, is incorrect. It has many points of similarity with W 2, leaving out the whole of the introduction, the same two verses and a half, and replacing the old irregular verses in the same way, as will appear from the various readings of verses 15 and 21.
THE KHANDAHSANKHYA. This short index must be considered a parisishta to the Khando-nukramanî. For the latter, though stating the number of verses in each metre besides the aggregate number of verses of all metres for every mandala, does not supply the totals of every metre for the whole Rigveda. This omission the Khandahsankhya, as I have entitled it, supplies. It is obviously wrong in two items: the number of panktis being stated to be 312 instead of only 248 (see Index of Metres, Appendix III), and that of the dvipadas as 17 instead of 127. The latter error may be due to the calculations of this index being based on totals in figures, as in the Khandosnukramani (see above), and being written in words after the 2 of 127 had dropped out. The remaining totals agree very nearly with those I have arrived at by adding up the aggregates of the metres in each mandala. My aggregates of all verses contained in each mandala, tally both with those of the Khando snukramani (excepting three slight variations, which will be explained below) and with the statements of Dayananda Sarasvati in his Rigvedabhâshya (pp. 1-8), except in mandalas VIII and IX, but in these two cases my totals agree with those of the Khando-nukramanî. In the former case the cause of the error is evident, as hymn 20 of mandala VIII
[III. 4.)
For Private And Personal Use Only
