And editions of D. S. Charitam consulted.

 

The three printed editions 1 that I first consulted before looking into the Mss. were:

(1) The Mysore Edition of Alkondavalli Govindacharya published in the Vidyatarangini Press in Telugu Script in 1885. 2

(2) The part-publication in the Grandha-Pradarshini series by S.P.S. Jagannatha Swami Ayyavaralu Garu (Arsha Press, Visakhapatam, in Devanagari Script 1896)

(3) The series of part-publications in the ‘Sahridaya’ by R. V. Krishnamacharya and published by the Bhaskara Press, Trivandrum. ('Devanagari)

1. A recent edition in Telugu Script by P. B. Annangaracharya and A. M. Shrinivasacharya, Rathnam Press, Madras 1953 has also been consulted. It contains the bare texts of the Kavya without any introduction or notes.

2. This seems to be out of print now.

The first of these and most probably the oldest edition is the only one that has been given to the public in completed book form. From the short introduction given to the work it appears that some Mss. were consulted and collated before the publication. For our purposes, these Mss. may be said to belong to the Mysore Group.

The Vizagapatam publication of Jagannatha Swam, must also have been the result of the collation of a few Mss. as would appear from the footnotes supplied in that part of the Grandha-Pradarshini Series which contains the first eight sargas of the Kavya. Even after sufficient enquiry it has not been possible to ascertain whether the publication of the Kavya was continued in the series or not. For purposes of comparative study, even this part publication of only eight sargas is useful as it is based on the collation of a group of Mss. very probably different from the Mysore group For convenience, these may be called the Visagapatam Mss.

The Sahridaya Publication is the latest. Besides consulting the original Mss. the editor has had in all probability access to the first two editions as well. The series stopped after the 17th sarga while the journal itself continued publication. These part-publications have not been brought out in book form. The foot notes given are exhaustive and quite explanatory.

Among the Mss. consulted, the two most important were from the private collections of Mr. T. G. Aravamuthan who very kindly and generously placed them at my disposal for purposes of comparative study. From the sources from which they were secured, these Mss. may be said to belong to the Tanjore group- They were in a good state of preservation and were written in the Pallava Grantha script.

I must also be grateful to the Jiyar of the Shriranga Narayana Jiyar Mutt, Shrirangam for placing an old Mss. of the Kavya from the Mutt Library at my disposal. This is also in the Grantha Script but unfortunately incomplete.

Besides these three Mss from private collections, the following Mss. in the Madras Government Oriental Manuscripts Library were also consulted:

1. Ms Serial No. 12150 (Descriptive Catalogue Vol. 21. Grantha)

2. ” ” No. 4670 (Triennial Catalogue Vol. 6. Sanskrit Grantha.)

3. ” “ No. 4558 ("Triennial Catalogue Vol. 6. Sanskrit Grantha.)

It is interesting to note that No. 4670 and No. 4558 originally belonged to the Yogi Parthasarathy Ayyangar’s collection in Triplicane. ("Madras)

It turns out thus that directly or indirectly Mss. from entirely different sources have been collated in order to form a critical estimate of the text of D. S. Charitara. From many points of view, such an estimate based on the collation of Mss from different sources is bound to be more authoritative and sound than that based on a few Mss. only, which may perhaps be even copies from one another.

Before proceeding to the text contained in these editions and Mss. a few facts may be set down here.

We saw how all the Mss. consulted were written in the Pallava Grantha Script. In certain Mss. an occasional variation in the manner of palm-leaf inscription shows the change of scribe Thus for instance, in the older Mss. of T. G. A. (which may be called T. G. A. No. 2) the scribe changes once from the reverse of page 35 upto the reverse of page 38, and then for the most part of the 11th sarga, pages 38 to 42. Sarga 15 of the Mss. also seems to have written by more than one scribe.

Variations in the manner of writing apart, occasional variations in actual script may be noticed. But being very rare as in T.G A. No. 2 where two shlokas in Sarga 15 are actually written in the Telugu Script, they may be set aside as of no consequence to us. It may be noted in passing that even in this instance the two shlokas have been struck off from the leaf (may be by the original scribe himself) and they have been written again in Grantha in the blank space on the left hand margin.

This variation in script may sometimes be due to the addition of a different topic altogether to the Mss. of the Kavya in one and the same bundle of leaves. Thus it was found that MS. No. 4558 contains Periyalvar Tirumoli verses in Tamil in the first few leaves before the actual Kavya starts in the Grantha script.

Perhaps, due to oversight and the lack of opportunity for verification and correction, the numbering of the shlokas and the pages in several Mss. is found to be defective. T.G.A. No. 2 may be cited as an instance.

After the 47th page the numbering of the next leaf somehow starts with 78 though the shloka numbering continues correct. On the 78th page the 77th shloka follows the 76th on page 47.

Two of the Mss. may be said to give indications as to the family in which they were preserved originally.

Thus T.G.A. I seems to have originally belonged to a family of the Kandadais, i.e., the descendants of Dasharathi, one of the chief disciples of Ramanuja. For at the end of the 2nd Sarga we find the invocation to Annan 3 in the following word':- „Annan Tiruvadigaje Saranam). This, however, is the only place where the invocations to Annan is found. At the end of the other Sargas in the Mss. the invocation is generally to Ramanuja in the following words:- ‘Shrimate Ramanujaya Namah’ 3. Annan is short for Koil Kandadai Annan.

Ms. No. 12'50 (or L.) may also be said to give a similar indication. For in the very beginning of the Ms. we find besides the usual invocation to Shri Ramanuja the following other ones:- Shrimadanantarya Gurave namah’, ‘Shrimate Govindaraji Gurave namah’, Shrimate Varadarya Gurave namah. ‘Shrivasa Gurave namah’. Annan Tiruvadigale Sharanam’, ‘Appan Tiruvadigale Sharanam’.

The last two must surely indicate that the Ms. have belonged to the descendants or the disciples of Annan or Appan, while the other three may point to the names of certain individual Acharyas of the line.

The Ms. No. 4558 contains an invocation shloka, evidently to Dasharathi and his descendants thereby showing again that it belonged probably to the family of the Kandadais, descendants of Dasharathi.

 

THE COLOPHONS

 

Coming to the textual part of the available editions and Mss., the colophons at the end of each sarga present a problem, for study. For apart from the apparent contradiction involved in cases where both the verse and prose colophons are set down together in the Mss., the absence of the verse colophon in some and of the prose colophon in others, the different readings of both given in different editions and Mss, and some times wholesale variatioas of them are all vital points to note in an examination of these colophons- For purposes of clearness and thoroughness each one of these aspects mentioned above may be considered one by one

1. The Verse Colophon: The colophon shloka is as follows:

It is found at all the editions and Mss. consulted contain the shloka though it may be with different readings here and there. It is usual to put down this shloka in full at the end of the first sarga and then give a shortened form of it at the end of other sargas in some such way as follows:- 'Swamityadi Sarvam Purvavat’ (T. O. A. 2, end of Sarga 17 page 125). 1, Some scholars think that ‘Kshmamesha ‘may be the correct word for ‘Kshmemesha’ M. S No. 4670 (O.R.L.) End of Sarga 16, page No. 143 and Ms. 4558 (O.R.L.) End of Sarga 15. (or) ‘Swamiranga + Sargodvitiyo Gatah (T. G. A. I, end of 2nd Sarga).

It may happen that even this shortened form is omitted at the end of later sargas in certain Mss. and editions of the Kavya. See the Mysore, the Vizagapatam and the Trivandrum Edns.) Also, T.G A. 1, T.G.A. 2, etc. But having been put down at the end of the opening sarga we may must take it that they were omitted subsequently to avoid repetition.

 

2. The Prose Colophons: The Prose Colophon found in the Mysore Edition runs as follows:The vizagapatam and the Sahridaya editions give this colophon in the same form as above. The editor of the former, however, points out that in certain Mss. that he consulted, ‘Shri’ is omitted and ‘Mahakavye’ included after ‘Divyasuri Charite’ (Foot Note 4th Sarga).

There are other readings of this prose colophon also which may be given – …………..

(Ms. No. 4558 O. R. L. end of 1st Sarga)

It is interesting to note that a slightly different reading of it is found at the end of the 16th sarga in this very Ms. thus: ………. Ms. No. 4670 O. R. L. has for ……..and omits ………….: (end of the 16th sarga) Ms. No. 12150 has ……….. for ……… (end of the 1st Sarga).

It may be noted that these slight variations in reading do not alter even in one case the purpose and meaning of the colophon. For purposes of convenience again and to avoid unnecessary repetition, the colophon given at the end of the first few sargas is either omitted altogether at the end of the later sargas as in Ms. 12150 or as is generally the case given in a shortened form as follows: …….. (T. G. A. 2) ………..(T. G. A. 2 end of Sarga 15)

Very often we find it simply stated thus: ……….’ at the end (Ms. 4670, 4558, and all the printed editions). In all cases where this form has appeared together with the fuller prose text. But at least in two Mss. T. G. A. 4 1 and the S.N.J M3. It is not clear whether this form is exactly so, for the text of the prose colophon is nowhere given in these two Mss.

The inscription ……..

……. (S. N. G.) seems to be out of place at the end of sarga 15, (S. N. G.) for nowhere either before or after, is the prose colophon given in the Ms. It is thus found that except T. G. A. I and the S. N. J. Ms. all the other editions and Mss consulted contain the prose colophon.

Finally as regards the colophons, we cannot but notice Ms. No. 12150 which affords the solitary instance of an Ms. of the Kavya which does not contain the colophon shloka. (This may perhaps be the instance referred to by the editor of the Vizagapatam series in his foot-note above cited.) But what we find in its place in the Ms. is another colophon shloka which can be easily found to be an exact synonym for that found in the other Mss. The shloka runs as follows: …………

This may, therefore, be taken as a case of variation of the verse colophon rather than of its absence.

 

3. Then we come to the most important textual problem, viz., the number of sargas in the Kavya. The Mysore edition contains 18 sargas. In the absence of any specific mention on this subject of the number of surgas in the Kavya, we must take it that the Mss. on which the editor relies contained 18 sargas or that at any rate he did not come across any containing more than 18 sargas.

As pointed out before, it has not been found possible to ascertain whether the Grantha-Pradarshini series publication was continued after the eighteenth sarga or not, and it is, therefore, not possible to say also how many sargas it contained.

The Sahridaya series of publications having stopped with the 17th sarga, even though the Journal continued other publications, makes us doubt whether the editor had access only to 17 sargas of the Kavya. Or, it may well be that the publication was stopped for other reasons.

There are certain Mss. which can be clearly said to be incomplete either because the original scribe himself left it as such, or because portions of the leaves in the Mss. have been lost through lapse of time. Thus T. G. A. 1 breaks off abruptly after the seventeenth verse of the 17th sarga on page 113, evidently showing that the rest of the leaves were lost. S. N. J. contains only 15 sargas in full. The 16th sarga is incomplete, nearly twenty stanzas being missing. Ms. No. 12150 breaks off on page 67 after the 89th shloka of sarga 12. Such obviously incomplete Mss. as cited above cannot help us to determine the number of sargas in the Kavya.

The problem itself, i.e., determination of the number of sargas need not arise at all but for the fact that three Mss. contain more than 18 sargas. They are 1. T. G. A. 2, 2. Ms. No. 4558 and 3. Ms. 4670. What seems more than a surprising coincidence is that nearly 12 stanzas from the 81st to the 92nd shloka in the 18th sarga should be found omitted in all these three Mss. It is also very striking that in all these the text should break off and be resumed exactly at the same point of the narration, exact to the very lrtter. In Ms. No. 4570, it is found that there is a break after the 81st shloka on page 158, thus ………..

Then the text commences on page 158 after a blank, thus: …….

In Ms. 4558, we find an exactly identical breaking off after the 81st shloka on page 79 reverse and an exactly identical resumption on page 80.

Another striking similarity between these three Mss. consists in the fact that the portion beyond the 18th sargas in them is incomplete. There is a sudden break in the second half of the 114th shloka, thus: ………… and at this point the narrative stops in the Ms. It is a point to note again that all the three Mss break off extactly at the same spot-extact to the very letter.

These similarities should naturally lead one to the conclusion that the three Mss. should have been copied from a common source. But, further scrutiny would reveal that it is not exactly so. Comparing the Ms. No. 4558 and 4670, the two Triplicane Mss. it is indeed possible to conclude on a point of similarity that they were either copied from the same source or were copies of each other. A similar comparison of T. G. A. 2 and Ms. No. 4558 would reveal that they are entirely different and could not have come from a common source. In the first place, we find that the colophons at the end of the first sarga are set down differently in the two Mss. While the O. R. L. Mss. contain both the verse and prose colophons in extenso, T. G. A. 2 has the verse colophon only. At the end of Sarga 2, the O. R. L. Ms. sets down the short prose colophon beside the colophon shloka whereas T. G. A. 2. has both in full. While Sarga 3 of the O. R. L. Ms. ends with the short prose colophon only, T. G. A. 2 ends with both the shloka being given in full and the prose text in its shortened form, thus: ………

The difference is even greater when we come to the end of the 15ih Sarga. While T G. A. 2 has the following ………

The O. R. L. Ms. concluded thus: ……

Then again the prose colophon is set down in extenso beside the shortned shloka form at the end of sarga 16 in the O. R. L. Ms. while only the short prose colophon is found in T. G. A 2.

Another striking difference to note between these two Mss. is that while in T. G. A. 2, from after the end of the 18th sarga, the leaves are numbered as ………. the same continuation in the other Ms. runs continuously on page 81 after the finish of the 18th sarga on page 80.

In other words, the numbering of the leaves continues the same till the very end, Thus, we are led to infer that these three Mss. should have originated from at least two different sources.

The point, however, to note is that they contain a good bit more than 18 sargas published in the Mysore edition. The incompleteness of this unpublished part, unfortunately, precludes the possibility of determining whether this formed part of the Kavya as its 19ih sarga or whether it was a later addition to it by a different author. As a through understanding of the text of this unpublished part alone can help to solve this problem and it also affords ample confirmatory evidence as to the author and date of the Kavya; the text is given separately.

1. A small note appended after the completion of the 18th Sarga in the Telugu Edition by P. B. Anijangaracharya and A, N. Shrinivasacharya seems to suggest the possibility of a ‘continuation’ of the Kavya.

 

PART II

CHAPTER I