{ "viewingDirection": "left-to-right", "metadata": [ { "label": "Origin Place", "value": "Northern India." }, { "label": "Provenance", "value": "Bought by Prof. C. Bendall from Bhagvan Das Kevaldas in Bombay, in 1885." }, { "label": "Extent", "value": "6 ff." }, { "label": "Funding", "value": "AHRC" }, { "label": "Date of Creation", "value": "18th-19th century." }, { "label": "Classmark", "value": "MS Add.2467" }, { "label": "Additions", "value": "

Marginalia<\/b><\/p>

Some deletions in black ink.<\/div>
Running marginal title (mā° du°<\/i>), top-left corner.<\/div><\/div>" }, { "label": "Subject(s)", "value": "Manuscripts, Sanskrit; Vyākaraṇa; Alaṅkāraśāstra" }, { "label": "Associated Name(s)", "value": "Māgha; Śaraṇadeva; Bhāravi; Bendall, Cecil; Kevaldas, Bhagvan Das" }, { "label": "Format", "value": "Pothī" }, { "label": "Data Source(s)", "value": "LVP 2467, direct inspection." }, { "label": "Language(s)", "value": "Sanskrit." }, { "label": "Author(s)", "value": "Rājakuṇḍa; Rājakuṇḍa" }, { "label": "Alternative Title(s)", "value": "Māghadurghaṭa" }, { "label": "Binding", "value": "

Folded paper sleeve. On the outer side of the paper sleeve<\/a>, written in black ink, the title and author (\"Māghadūrghaṭam - rājatuṇḍaḥ\", with the \"tu\" crossed out in blue ink and replaced with \"ku\"), the number of folios (\"pa° 6\"), and the number of śloka<\/i>s (\"ślo° 175\"). Above, in a smaller hand, is written \"No 216 in hist\" and the classmark (\"2467\").<\/p>" }, { "label": "Condition", "value": "It seems complete, in good condition. There is a gap between the fifth and sixth folios, although the gap does not indicate an entire folio's worth of material." }, { "label": "Script", "value": "

Devanāgarī in black ink. <\/div><\/div>" }, { "label": "Excerpts", "value": "
Rubric:<\/b> [1v1]<\/a> sŕī gaṇeśāya namaḥ ||<\/div>
Incipit:<\/b> [1v1]<\/a> krīḍā me dbhutadughaṭāni<\/i>(!)<\/i> || kathaṃ vasan_ dadarśeti liṭ_ || yā° || parokṣe vihitosau || nu° || dhā[1v2]tusaṃbaṃdhe pratyaya iti liṭ_ || [<\/i>-1-<\/i>]<\/i>sādhutvaṃ || hiraṇyagarbhāṃgabhūr iti kathaṃ || yā° || aṃgabhūśabda [<\/i>u<\/i>]<\/i>rase putre varttate ||<\/div>
Explicit:<\/b> [6r4]<\/a> nu° || śeṣārthānāṃ casau niṣadha iti bhāgavṛttiḥ || nu° || matyāmtare bhaviṣyat〚<\/i>i<\/i>〛<\/i>īti ta[6r5]ṅāyāvat_ || vṛvṛsire karmaṇi rājapatibhir iti pāṭhām_ nyato visā || 17 ||<\/div>
Final Rubric:<\/b> [6r6]<\/a> iti śrīrājakruṃḍavira[6r7]cite māghakāvyadurghaṭe 〚<\/i>-3-<\/i>〛<\/i>sargāḥ samāptaḥ || '17' || śrīr astu kalyāṇam astu<\/div>" }, { "label": "Physical Location", "value": "Cambridge University Library" }, { "label": "Abstract", "value": "

This paper manuscript contains the Māghakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i> by Rājakuṇḍa (written Rājakruṃḍa in the manuscript), a commentary on the Śiśupālavadha<\/i> of Māgha. The text consists of grammatical glosses of a few selected passages from each sarga<\/i> of Māgha's 20-sarga<\/i> poem. It seems to take its inspiration, both in terms of style and content, from the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i> of Śaraṇadeva, a grammatical text that glosses certain words and passages from Sanskrit literature that are difficult (durghaṭa<\/i>) to explain in terms of Pāṇinian grammar. For example, compare this passage from the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i>: \"kathaṃ sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambhuneti māghaḥ | ....tṛtīyāyā atulopamābhyām iti niṣedhāt | ucyate | sahavivakṣāyāṃ tṛtīyā | ....śambhuneti atra tu tulyārthasyāprādhānyāc ca na pratiṣedhaḥ |\" (Renou 1940: 85) with the same gloss in the manuscript: \"sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambhuneti kathaṃ | yā° | tulyārthair atulopamābhyām ity atrātu atulopamābhyām iti niṣedhāt | nu° | sahayoge prannatyāditvā<\/i>(!)<\/i> tṛtīyā |\" (folio 1 verso, line 3<\/a>). The focus of this passage is the Pāṇinian rule 2.3.72, \"tulyārthair atulopamābhyām tṛtīyānyatarasyām\", which states that a word in the third (instrumental) case can be used in conjunction with a word meaning tulya<\/i>, 'equal', but not with its synonyms tulā<\/i> or upamā<\/i>. In the quote \"sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambunā\", from the first sarga<\/i> of the Śiśupālavadha<\/i>, the instrumental \"śambhunā\" is used in conjunction with \"upamā\", which seems to be prohibited by the rule. The explanation given here is that the instrumental case is not used to give the sense of 'equal to', but rather to give the sense of 'with' (\"saha\"). As one can see in the manuscript excerpt, the abbreviation \"yā°\" serves to introduce the Pāṇinian rule that seems to be contradicted by the quoted example, and then \"nu°\" introduces a counter-explanation of why the example is, in fact, correct Sanskrit. Following this interpretation, the abbreviations could stand for yathā<\/i> and nanu<\/i> respectively. The use of nanu<\/i> to introduce an objection is found in the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i>, although \"ucyate\" is the most common formula, as seen above. Rājakuṇḍa is also the author of the Kirātārjunīyakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i>, an unpublished commentary on the Kirātārjunīya<\/i> of Bhāravi. This manuscript contains the commentary on the first 17 sarga<\/i>s of the poem, and seems to be the only attested witness of the Māghakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i>, which remains unpublished. <\/p>" }, { "label": "Title", "value": "Māghakāvyadurghaṭa" }, { "label": "Author(s) of the Record", "value": "Charles Li., CUDL PID Workflow" }, { "label": "Material", "value": "Paper.

Leaf height: 9.5 cm, width: 23.5 cm. <\/p>" }, { "label": "Layout", "value": "Written height: 7 cm, width: 17.5 cm.

15 lines per page, approximately 35 to 40 akṣara<\/i>s per line.<\/p> Akṣara height: 4 mm. Interlinear space height: 2 mm.

Marginal frame lines.<\/p>" }, { "label": "Foliation", "value": "

1. Original: Devanāgarī numerals, mid-right margin, verso.<\/p>" }, { "label": "Bibliography", "value": "

Descriptions of the manuscript<\/b><\/p>

ULIB 7/3/55 = Bradshaw, Henry, Notes on the collections of Oriental, Thibetan and 'Additional' manuscripts [unpublished manuscript]<\/i> (Cambridge: 1870-80).<\/div>
ULIB 7/1/4 = Griffith, Ralph T. H. and Daniel Wright, Assorted lists of manuscripts and books, chiefly Oriental, acquired by the Library, with related papers [unpublished manuscript]<\/i> (Cambridge: 1873).<\/div>
List of Oriental MSS. Class Catalogue of Oriental MSS.<\/i> (Cambridge: 1900\u2013).<\/div>
LVP = de La Vallée Poussin, Louis and Caroline Mary Ridding, U[niversity.L[ibrary].C[ambridge]. Catalogue of Sanskrit MSS<\/i> (Cambridge: 1916).<\/div><\/div>

Manuscripts<\/b><\/p>

No other manuscripts known.<\/div><\/div>

Edition(s)<\/b><\/p>

The text remains unpublished.<\/div><\/div>

Secondary Literature<\/b><\/p>

Kak, Ram Chandra and Harabhaṭṭa Śāstrī, Śiśupālavadham<\/i> (Dillī: Bhāratīya Buka Kārporeśana, 1990).<\/div>
Renou, Louis, Le Durghaṭavṛtti de Śaraṇadeva<\/i> (Paris: Société d´Édition «Les Belles Lettres», 1940).<\/div>
Sharma, Rama Nath, The Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini Vol III: English Translation of Adhyāyas Two and Three with Sanskrit Text, Transliteration, Word-Boundary, Anuvṛtti, Vṛtti, Explanatory Notes, Derivational History of Examples, and Indices<\/i> (New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal, 1995).<\/div>
Śâstrî, T. Gaṇapati, The Durghatavritti of Saraṇadeva<\/i> (Trivandrum: Travancore Government Press, 1909).<\/div><\/div>
" } ], "@type": "sc:Manifest", "attribution": "Provided by Cambridge University Library. Cambridge University Library Images made available for download are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Unported License (CC BY-NC 4.0) This metadata is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 Unported License.", "structures": [{ "canvases": ["http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/iiif/MS-ADD-02467/canvas/1"], "@type": "sc:Range", "@id": "http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/iiif/MS-ADD-02467/range/DOCUMENT", "label": "Māghakāvyadurghaṭa" }], "description": "

This paper manuscript contains the Māghakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i> by Rājakuṇḍa (written Rājakruṃḍa in the manuscript), a commentary on the Śiśupālavadha<\/i> of Māgha. The text consists of grammatical glosses of a few selected passages from each sarga<\/i> of Māgha's 20-sarga<\/i> poem. It seems to take its inspiration, both in terms of style and content, from the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i> of Śaraṇadeva, a grammatical text that glosses certain words and passages from Sanskrit literature that are difficult (durghaṭa<\/i>) to explain in terms of Pāṇinian grammar. For example, compare this passage from the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i>: \"kathaṃ sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambhuneti māghaḥ | ....tṛtīyāyā atulopamābhyām iti niṣedhāt | ucyate | sahavivakṣāyāṃ tṛtīyā | ....śambhuneti atra tu tulyārthasyāprādhānyāc ca na pratiṣedhaḥ |\" (Renou 1940: 85) with the same gloss in the manuscript: \"sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambhuneti kathaṃ | yā° | tulyārthair atulopamābhyām ity atrātu atulopamābhyām iti niṣedhāt | nu° | sahayoge prannatyāditvā<\/i>(!)<\/i> tṛtīyā |\" (folio 1 verso, line 3<\/a>). The focus of this passage is the Pāṇinian rule 2.3.72, \"tulyārthair atulopamābhyām tṛtīyānyatarasyām\", which states that a word in the third (instrumental) case can be used in conjunction with a word meaning tulya<\/i>, 'equal', but not with its synonyms tulā<\/i> or upamā<\/i>. In the quote \"sphuṭopamaṃ bhūtisitena śambunā\", from the first sarga<\/i> of the Śiśupālavadha<\/i>, the instrumental \"śambhunā\" is used in conjunction with \"upamā\", which seems to be prohibited by the rule. The explanation given here is that the instrumental case is not used to give the sense of 'equal to', but rather to give the sense of 'with' (\"saha\"). As one can see in the manuscript excerpt, the abbreviation \"yā°\" serves to introduce the Pāṇinian rule that seems to be contradicted by the quoted example, and then \"nu°\" introduces a counter-explanation of why the example is, in fact, correct Sanskrit. Following this interpretation, the abbreviations could stand for yathā<\/i> and nanu<\/i> respectively. The use of nanu<\/i> to introduce an objection is found in the Durghaṭavṛtti<\/i>, although \"ucyate\" is the most common formula, as seen above. Rājakuṇḍa is also the author of the Kirātārjunīyakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i>, an unpublished commentary on the Kirātārjunīya<\/i> of Bhāravi. This manuscript contains the commentary on the first 17 sarga<\/i>s of the poem, and seems to be the only attested witness of the Māghakāvyadurghaṭa<\/i>, which remains unpublished. <\/p>", "logo": "http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/themeui/theme/images/logo.svg", "@id": "http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/iiif/MS-ADD-02467", "label": "Māghakāvyadurghaṭa (MS Add.2467)", "sequences": [{ "canvases": [], "@type": "sc:Sequence", "@id": "http://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/iiif/MS-ADD-02467/sequence", "label": "Current Page Order" }], "@context": "http://iiif.io/api/presentation/2/context.json", "seeAlso": "https://services.cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/v1/metadata/tei/MS-ADD-02467/" }