Commentaries on Ramayana
zysk at HUM.KU.DK
Fri Oct 17 06:25:42 UTC 2003
I thank Prof. Brockington for his useful comments, and hope that Bob Goldman could also give me some advice on these matters, with some useful references.
With best wishes,
----- Original Message -----
From: John Brockington
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:35 PM
Subject: Re: Commentaries on Ramayana
on 15/10/03 7:27 am, Kenneth Zysk wrote:
> Perhaps someone can help with information about several commentaries on the
> Ramayana. I should appreciate any information, dates, etc., with possible
> references for the following commentaries:
The best person to ask about this is Robert Goldman, who has studied them
intensively as part of his work on the Princeton translation of the Critical
Edition of the R-am-aya,na. However, here are some initial reactions.
> 1. "Tilaka:" According to CC vol. 1 (pp. 515, 523) the author is Ramavarman or
> Ramasarman, son of Himmativarman, pupil of Nagesa. However, accordinging to
> the Critical Edition, vol. 5 (p. xi), the author is Nagesa. Which is correct?
The general consensus is that the Tilaka commentary was written by N-age'sa
Bha.t.ta; why the CC suggests otherwise is unclear to me.
> 2. "Ramayanatattvadipika" of Mahesvaratirtha or Mahesa. According to CC vol. 1
> (p. 446), the author is a pupil of Narayanatirtha, who could be the son of
> Nilakanthasuri of Varanasi, thus putting his date in the 18th cent. However,
> the Critical Edition, vol. 1 (p. xxx) dates him at around A.D. 1550.
> Clarification ?
Since this is one of the older commentaries, the earlier date seems more
likely than the later.
> 3. "Ramayanasiromani." An edition of the Ramayana with three commentaries
> printed by The News Printing Press of Gujarati in about 1918-19 (no date is
> given), contains a commentary called Ramayanasiromani, which, according to the
> opening mangala verses, seems to have been authored by a disciple of
> Vamsidhara. I do cannot find any other reference to this commentary. What is
> the problem here?
The R-am-aya.na'siroma.ni is generally ascribed to Va.m's-idhara
'Sivasah-aya and this seems consistent with its opening verses.
Professor J. L. Brockington
Secretary General, International Association of Sanskrit Studies
Sanskrit, School of Asian Studies
7 Buccleuch Place
Edinburgh EH8 9LW U.K.
tel: +131 650 4174
fax: +131 651 1258
More information about the INDOLOGY