2025-04-20 14:31:59 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
अमरुशतकम्
hand, it is not a composite manuscript. The margins are
ruled in two red lines upto folio 16 only.
It does not give the introductory verses of Vema's
commentary. It does not give the text. There are no
marginal corrections.
The manuscript is very corrupt, eg it gives कान्तिया
for कान्तया ; अर्जवेण for आर्जवेन ; स्फट: for स्फुट: ; खंडौ for खड्डौ,
त्रिडागम: for · इडागमः, शुकहासेन for शुष्कहासेन, सान्त्वियितः for
सान्त्वयतः ; in fact, these corruptions literally run into
hundreds In many places it avoids giving synonym for
every word, as the exemplar does as सहृदयः = रसिकः ; नय-
नाम्बु = अश्रु ; बन्धुषु = स्वजनेषु; गण्डयोः =
: कपोलयोः; केलिरुचिः = क्रीडा-
प्रिय:. There are quite a few lacunae in the commentary, as
in stz. 11, stz. 34, stz. 58, stz. 72, stz. 86, stz. 87, stz 88 and
stz. 92. There is no date, but the manuscript does not appear
to be very old. The colophon gives the following stanza:
आवर्तः संशयानामविनयभवनं पट्टणं साहसानां दोषाणां सन्निपातं कपटशतमयं
क्षेत्रमप्रत्ययानाम् । स्वर्गद्वारस्य विघ्नं नरकपुरमुखं सर्वमायाकरण्डं स्त्रीयन्त्रं
केन सृष्टं विषममृतमयं प्राणिनां प्राणनाथः ॥ छ ॥ छ ॥ छ ॥
D 2
Paper ms 12" x 4"; folios 62; stanzas 52 and 53 bear the
same number 52 and hence there is a difference of one in
the numbering of subsequent stanzas, the last stanza being
numbered one hundred instead of one-hundred and one.
The hand-writing is very bold, close and uniform. There are
nine lines to a page and an average of thirty-nine letters to
a line. The margins are ruled in two lines in black ink. It
does not give the introductory verses of Vema's commentary.
The text and commentary are given runningly and con-
secutively. No corrections are made in the margin.
hand, it is not a composite manuscript. The margins are
ruled in two red lines upto folio 16 only.
It does not give the introductory verses of Vema's
commentary. It does not give the text. There are no
marginal corrections.
The manuscript is very corrupt, eg it gives कान्तिया
for कान्तया ; अर्जवेण for आर्जवेन ; स्फट: for स्फुट: ; खंडौ for खड्डौ,
त्रिडागम: for · इडागमः, शुकहासेन for शुष्कहासेन, सान्त्वियितः for
सान्त्वयतः ; in fact, these corruptions literally run into
hundreds In many places it avoids giving synonym for
every word, as the exemplar does as सहृदयः = रसिकः ; नय-
नाम्बु = अश्रु ; बन्धुषु = स्वजनेषु; गण्डयोः =
: कपोलयोः; केलिरुचिः = क्रीडा-
प्रिय:. There are quite a few lacunae in the commentary, as
in stz. 11, stz. 34, stz. 58, stz. 72, stz. 86, stz. 87, stz 88 and
stz. 92. There is no date, but the manuscript does not appear
to be very old. The colophon gives the following stanza:
आवर्तः संशयानामविनयभवनं पट्टणं साहसानां दोषाणां सन्निपातं कपटशतमयं
क्षेत्रमप्रत्ययानाम् । स्वर्गद्वारस्य विघ्नं नरकपुरमुखं सर्वमायाकरण्डं स्त्रीयन्त्रं
केन सृष्टं विषममृतमयं प्राणिनां प्राणनाथः ॥ छ ॥ छ ॥ छ ॥
D 2
Paper ms 12" x 4"; folios 62; stanzas 52 and 53 bear the
same number 52 and hence there is a difference of one in
the numbering of subsequent stanzas, the last stanza being
numbered one hundred instead of one-hundred and one.
The hand-writing is very bold, close and uniform. There are
nine lines to a page and an average of thirty-nine letters to
a line. The margins are ruled in two lines in black ink. It
does not give the introductory verses of Vema's commentary.
The text and commentary are given runningly and con-
secutively. No corrections are made in the margin.