Madhuvidya

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

Page 709

Reviews
361
ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF PURANIC BELIEFS AND PRACTICES:
by Sadashiv A. Dange, Three Volumes, Vol. I (A-C), Vol. II (DG. ), Vol. III (H-N.). Navrang, New Delhi, 1986, 1987. Pp. 370, 371-746, 747-1069, Price : Rs. 325/- each.
Here we have, as the title immediately indicates, an extremely useful tool for further research. Prof. Dange has excerpted the relevant material from the nineteen Mahāpurāņas (the well-known eighteen plus the Sivapură a which is supposed to be an upapurāoa ) and published it for the benefit of research scholars as well as general readers. The interest in knowing the ancient fojian beliefs and practices is ever-growing and when all the volumes are published they will no doubt go a long way in satisfying this curiosity. The author and his colleagues, whose names appear in the Preface, havo undertaken a task which must have required a good deal of industry. .
The author's emphasis wbile collectiog the material has been sociomythological'. He specifically tells us that personal names appear in the Iodex “only when they have some belief attached to them, or when there is some custom or practice associated with them. Mere dynastic or personal details are discarded" (Preface p. vii ).
After having thus told the readers what to expect in the lodex, Prof. Dange tells us that the entire material bas been arranged subject-wise'. This gives an impression that the entries have been first classified under different subjects like social, political, economic, religious etc. and then under these heads the entries have been arranged in an alphabetical order. But this is not the case. All the entries in the Index appear in their alphabetical order. Wbat the author apparently meant by subject-wise' arrangement is that the entry-heads are chosen not on the basis of the priacipal characters but on the basis of the socio-mythological' content of the entries. Thus, for example, the second entry-head in Vol. I is not Bharadvăja, but Adoption.
Even a cursory look at the entries would be enough to give the reader an idea of the wealth of information supplied in these Volumes. It is not possible here to go into the details of even some selected entries for their evaluation that could be the subject of an independent article. However, on reading the first four entries one gets the impression that much more care should have been devoted to check the accuracy of the statements made. This becomes in particular necessary because the Volumes are likely to be used by non-Sanskritists and such readers cannot be expected to look up
Madhu Vidyā/684