Bhandarkar Report 1904
BHANDAKAR REPORT on the search of Prākṛit and Saṃskṛit manuscripts 1904 [50 of 69]
(← … https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/9570/bhandarkar-report-1904)
50. In the list that was brought to me occurred the name “Rāvaṇabhāṣya Yajuḥ.” Rāvaṇa is an author generally credited with having written Bhāṣyas or Commentaries on the Ṛig and Yajur Vedas (Journ., Beng. As. Soc., Vol. XXXI, pp. 129—184), But beyond a few extracts from the first occurring in other works, nothing of them is as yet known to be in existence. So the manuscript referred to was one that I naturally was very anxious to see and one of the two manuscripts sent to me was meant for that. The other manuscript was sent to me early in the afternoon, this one late in the evening. The bundle was labelled “Vedabhāṣya Rāvaṇakṛita '' (Commentary on a Veda by Rāvaṇa). But on opening it I found the manuscript to be one of Mahīdhara's Commentary on the Yajuryeda (Sveta), which has been published and of which numerous manuscripts are widely scattered. There was nothing anywhere in the manuscript that I could see, which could have been the cause of its being mistaken for a copy of Rāvaṇa's Bhāṣya. Since my return I have written to the Political Agent to hare careful enquiries made as to the existence of a manuscript of Rāvaṇa's Bhāṣya on Yajuryeda in Shahpura. Should I succeed in recovering the lost work I should consider myself amply recompensed for the loss of time and the very great worry I had to undergo in crossing the sandy desert, without a metalled road, from Lambia to Shahpura and from Shahpura to Deoli on my way to Bundi, which would otherwise prove to have been undergone in vain.
[continuation … → … https://www.om-arham.org/blog/view/9572/bhandarkar-report-1904]
