Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 436

Annals BORI, LXV (1984)
feature of the sabha of Kubera, and Yudhisthira, while mentioning the special features of the sabha of Kubera, does make a reference to it.14 Yudhisthira's saying that Narada had briefly enumerated the Gandharvas for the Indrasabha is thus not in harmony with the text that has been admit. ted into the critical edition.
248
But if one looks to the passages marked with the asterisk relegated to the foot-notes one finds that the north-eastern group (except the Nepall version) has, indeed, a brief listing of the Gandharvas visvävasus citrasenah sumanas tarunas tatha *86,15 The southern recension too has a listing of the Gandharvas: visvävasul citrasenah pravatas tumbarus tatha *87,14 Since the listing is not found in all the versions, the editor of the Sabhaparvan has not admitted it into the constituted text; but since the stanza placed in the mouth of Yudhisthira which says that Narada had made a brief listing of the Gandharvas for the Indrasabha is found in all the versions it has been admitted into the critically constituted text, This has led to an internal incongruity which must form the subject of higher criticism.
There could be two ways of setting aside the incongruity: (1) First, we may assume that the listing of the Gandharvas for the Indrasabha was not there in the ur-text considered to be at the basis of all the versions and hence a reference to its brief listing in the third quarter of the stanza put in the mouth of Yudhisthira was also not there. When, at a later stage, the listing was added in the southern and the north-eastern (except the Nepali version) recensions, the third quarter of the stanza of Yudhisthira was also suitably modified in order to indicate this listing. Later, only this stanza of Yudhisthira in its modified form, that is as it now appears in the critical edition, got into the north-western recension and the Nepäll version due to contamination. Whosoever was responsible for this contamination remained. ignorant of the resulting incongruity. (2) Or, we have to assume that a short listing of the Gandharvas for the Indrasabbă did occur in the urtext and, consequently, a reference to it in the third quarter of Yudhisthira's stanza, as we now find it, was also there. Later, this brief listing for the Indrasabha was dropped in the North-western recension and the Nepall version, probably because the enumeration of the Gandharvas (and the Apsaris) was thought fit for the sabha of Kubera, and not of Indra. But it was overlooked that the dropping of this brief listing of the Gandharvas
14 tatha dhanapateḥ... gandharvapsarasas caiva (kathitaḥ) 2. 11.45.
15 Of course with some variant readings.
18
*87 also contains a list of the Apsaras.
17 How this third quarter looked like in the ur-text before it was modified is hard to say.
Madhu Vidya/411