________________
梵語仏教写本の文献学的研究
why the same one manuscript was divided into two, and only one portion was bestowed. Dr. Hahn also reported that the National Archives has another ms. of this text which was copied from the original ms. when it was still complete10). Although this copied ms. is apparently a later one, it has its own value because of its completeness. In any case we were able to take color photographs of both mss. by special permission of the National Archives authorities.
We are planning to publish a new facsimile edition of this unique text, incorporating these two divided mss. in order to restore it to its original form, with the kind collaboration of Prof. Hahn. The National Archives readily gave us their authorization and cooperation for this project. A long-parted couple meets together after a century's separation. Isn't it an appropriate celebration for the centenary of the Otani Expedition ?
III. Additional Remarks on Two Other Mss. in the Collection
No. 614 Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra (Ryukoku B ms.) & No. 615 Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra (Ryukoku A ms.)
Detailed descriptions of these two mss. are given in the introductory part of the abovementioned facsimile edition of this text. So far a total of seven mss. of this text were known to exist, including the two in our possession. They are listed here with the abbreviation (NS, NB, etc.) and the Reel Number of Nepal German Manuscript Preservation Project (NGMPP) respectively.
NS Nepal samvat 796 (=1675/6 C. E.) folios 131 A 114/1 NB Nepal samvat 1021 (=1901/2 C. E. folios 145 D 85/4 NA Undated folios 113 A 112/13 NC Nepal samvat 1026 (=1905/6 C. E.) folios 126 B 88/4 NX Nepal samvat 1027 (=1906/7 C. E.) folios 251 A 113/5 R(-yukoku)B Undated folios 187
R(-yukoku) A Undated folios 171 Recently I found out another three among the Nepal mss. microfilmed by NGMPP. NK(-arikā) No Date
folios 17 (Incomplete) E 1768/14 N2 Vikrama Samvat 1957 (=1900 C. E.) folios 196 E 1923/5
N3 Nepal Samvat 1025 (=1904/05 C. E.) folios 155 E 1367/11 I dealt with these newly-found mss. in two recent articles 11). From these two articles of mine, I here only extract and reproduce the table showing clearly the position which our two mss. occupy in the somewhat complicated recension of this text. (*X ) NS(1678) ► N2(1900) NC(1905/6) → RA(undated) ...---→NB(1901/2) (N3(1904/5)] → NA(undated)
- NX(1906/7)
--- RB(undated)
→(*NL) → Lévi's edition (1907) ►NK(undated)
( 34 )
