________________
-27
16.
I have supplied the punctuation on the basis of the vrtti on pp. 153-55.
The variant reading available on p. 153 is na preyas tad-viruddhah (or
tad viruddhah) syad. However, this reading is not likely to be original.
Note the genitives prey as ah and tasya in the vrtti immediately preceding
and following the karika. Secondly, the manuscript is obviously broken
and damaged at the point where the variant reading occurs. It is likely
to be a result of guesswork based on partially preserved letters.
17.
As far as I can ascertain, De too is silent about this preculiarity of the
manuscripts. 18. On p. 221, K gives an intelligible version of a Pkt. verse which De (1961: • 208) found "too corrupt and fragmentary" in his sources. The same applies
to p. 232 corresponding to De p. 214. 19. I assume this stands for 12 3/4" X 1 3/4". 20. (a) This may mean between 1243 and 1293 A.D. or between 1343 and 1393 A.D.
In a strict us age, the period including 1301 and 1400 should count as
the 14th century of the Vikrama era, but occasionally it is noticed
that Indian scholars think of periods such as 1401-1499 as 14th century,
etc.
(b) Here I am translating from Gujarati. The catalogue contains two more
details which read in Gujarati as "samha. sres tha. da. sres tha."
Since I could not see in the catalogue any explanation of the short
-forms samha and da, I do not know what they mean. As saṁha is followed
by the adjectives śrestha, madhyama (p. 1), jīra-prāya, and atijīrna (e.g. on p. 169), I would guess that it stands for samhati 'togetherness,
continuity', meaning in effect 'the physical condition of the manuscript
leaves,' a device to indicate whether the leaves are holding together,
have fallen apart or are about to fall apart.
