________________
INTRODUCTION
lated into Tibetan in 840 A.C. Therefore his date cannot be 1025 A.C.
Dānaśīla21 accompanied Sākyasrībhadra when he went to Tibet in 1206. Therefore his date cannot be 1025 A.C.
VADANYĀYA MS.
In June 1934, I saw the palm leaf MS. of the Vipañcitārthā, the commentary?? by Sāntarakṣita on the - Vādanyāya of Dharmakirti, in the monastery of Kunde-ling (Lhasa).
I thought that it was not possible to find the text, and I began the work of restoration from Tibetan into Sanskrit, but after two months when I visited the monastery of Nagor, which has got the largest number of palm leaf mss. in Tibet, viz. 40 volumes, I found among those msş. a copy of the Vādanyāya.2 There was another copy of the Vādanyāya24 țīkā25 in the same collection, but I was given very limited time to make a catalogue of the mss. and copy of the Vādanyāya text. This ms. of the Vādanyāya ţikā is written in a rough and running hand, so it was not easy to make out the differences between the two commentaries, (one of which is now being published). I took some photographs of the Vādanyāya and the commentary above mentioned but the negatives did not come out all right. The Kun-de-ling ms. is written in an excellent hand.
21 Vide appendix D. 22 History of Buddhism Pt. II., p. 155. 28 See appendix D. 24 ibid. D. 25 See JBORS, Vol. XXI, Part I, p. 7.
