ciciir.su.h and dudru.su.h

[Roland Steiner]

I have checked the critical edition of the Padmaprabh.rtakam by
J. R. A. Loman ("The Padmapraabh.rtakam. An Ancient Bhaa.na Assigned
to ;Suudraka." [Ph.D. thesis by] J. R. A. Loman. Amsterdam 1956) who
used the following four manuscripts:
        A: Governmental Oriental MSS Library of Madras; modern paper,
Devanaagarii.
        B: Governmental Oriental MSS Library of Madras; modern
paper, Devanaagarii.
        C: Palace Library of Trivandrum; palm-leaf,
Malayaalam.
        D: Travancore MSS library of Trivandrum; palm-leaf,
Malayaalam.
Loman says in his introduction that he was not able to trace the
genealogy of the MSS-material and to consider the history of the
text. The text of the edition runs as follows (16.29-30; pp. 29-30):
        ki.m bravii.si / kva sa.mciciir.su.h / ti.s.tha taavat / kim asi
dudruu.sur iti /
        Variants: bravii.si om. B. - kva sa.mciciir.su.h D corrupt -
dudruu.sur : dudru.su.h A.
Accordingly, dudru.su.h indeed seems to be just a mistake for the
correct dudruu.su.h. The form sa.mciciir.su.h, however, seems to be
definitely wrong (Loman´s Malayaalam-MS D is corrupt here), also
according to ;Sarvavarman´s Kaatantra. The "obvious" emendation
-cikiir.su.h does not fit the context in which I would expect a
somewhat 'pretentious' rather than a wrong form. Therefore, I would
suggest reading sa.mcicari.su.h instead of sa.mciciir.su.h. (perhaps
a scribal error because of a wrong association with the well known
form-cikiir.su.h).


--
Dr. Roland Steiner
Fachgebiet Indologie, FB 11 der Philipps-Universitaet
Wilhelm-Roepke-Strasse 6
D-35032 Marburg (Briefanschrift / for letters)
D-35039 Marburg (Paketanschrift / for parcels)
Germany
Tel.: +49-6421-282184; Fax: +49-6421-284995
email: steiner at Mailer.Uni-Marburg.DE