2025-04-20 14:32:01 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
८
अमरुशतकम्
does not explain even compound expressions like Mala-
तान्तनयनं, कोमललालवाहुलतिकापाशेन etc.
Bm
Devanagari transcript of a manuscript from the mss.
library of the Oriental Institute, Baroda. The original is a
palm-leaf ms in Malayalam characters; No. of folios 73;
size 11" x 1". There are nine lines to a page, and forty-
eight letters to a line. The writing is clear and legible. The
stanzas are regularly numbered at the close of the commen-
tary on each stanza. No demarcations such as the Dandas
are used; marginal and interlinear corrections are few and
far between. It is in a good condition.
It shows the same tendency as that in the previously
described manuscript of avoiding paraphrase of each and
every word and explanation of compounds. There are a
few lacunae. The text is very corrupt. Stanza No. 99 is not
given so that the total number is 100 instead of 101.
Mt
This is a printed edition of the text and commentary in
Telugu characters; edited by Shri Chedulwada Sitarama-
śastri, with a Telugu commentary. It is printed in Madras
in the year 1865. It is fairly correct and full.
It begins :- अविघ्नमस्तु ।
विशंकटकटस्थलीगलदमन्ददानस्पृहा भ्रमद्भ्रमरकाकलीकलितनित्यकर्णो-
त्सवम् । प्रणम्रजनमस्तकप्रकटडिंडिमाडंबरं मुखे गजमुपास्महे वपुषि मानुष
दैवतम् । and then अन्योन्यमेलनवशात् etc.
I have also noted, for the text only, the variants given in
the various mss. of the Śrigāradīpikā collected by Richard
Simon, and these mss are indicated by the following
symbols in Simon's edition: O,Co; T,Ct; U.Cu; Oa,Coa;
and S,Cs.
अमरुशतकम्
does not explain even compound expressions like Mala-
तान्तनयनं, कोमललालवाहुलतिकापाशेन etc.
Bm
Devanagari transcript of a manuscript from the mss.
library of the Oriental Institute, Baroda. The original is a
palm-leaf ms in Malayalam characters; No. of folios 73;
size 11" x 1". There are nine lines to a page, and forty-
eight letters to a line. The writing is clear and legible. The
stanzas are regularly numbered at the close of the commen-
tary on each stanza. No demarcations such as the Dandas
are used; marginal and interlinear corrections are few and
far between. It is in a good condition.
It shows the same tendency as that in the previously
described manuscript of avoiding paraphrase of each and
every word and explanation of compounds. There are a
few lacunae. The text is very corrupt. Stanza No. 99 is not
given so that the total number is 100 instead of 101.
Mt
This is a printed edition of the text and commentary in
Telugu characters; edited by Shri Chedulwada Sitarama-
śastri, with a Telugu commentary. It is printed in Madras
in the year 1865. It is fairly correct and full.
It begins :- अविघ्नमस्तु ।
विशंकटकटस्थलीगलदमन्ददानस्पृहा भ्रमद्भ्रमरकाकलीकलितनित्यकर्णो-
त्सवम् । प्रणम्रजनमस्तकप्रकटडिंडिमाडंबरं मुखे गजमुपास्महे वपुषि मानुष
दैवतम् । and then अन्योन्यमेलनवशात् etc.
I have also noted, for the text only, the variants given in
the various mss. of the Śrigāradīpikā collected by Richard
Simon, and these mss are indicated by the following
symbols in Simon's edition: O,Co; T,Ct; U.Cu; Oa,Coa;
and S,Cs.