MBh. 2.54.22

[Dominic Goodall]

As you've probably noticed, there seem to be a few other passages in  
the Mahaabhaarata (2.25:6, 2.25:19, 2.47:4, 3.79:24) in which it is  
clear that horses are meant.

It seems, by the way, that tittirikalmaa.sa should be treated as one  
variety and not two, for there is a description of the king's stables  
in Har.sacarita 2 which begins with:

atha vanaayujai.h , aara.t.tajai.h, kaambojai.h, bhaaradvaajai.h,  
sandhude"sajai.h, paarasiikai"s ca, "so.nai"s ca, "syaamai"s ca,  
"svetai"s ca, pi~njarai"s ca, haridbhi"s ca, tittirikalmaa.sai"s ca,  
pa~ncabhadrai"s ca, mallikaak.sai"s ca, k.rttikaapi~njarai"s ca,  
aayatanirmaa.msamukhai.h, anutka.takar.nako"sai.h,...

tittirikalmaa.sa there is taken by Cowell and Thomas to mean "dappled  
like partridges", and this reflects the old commentary of "Sa"nkara  
(pp.99--100 of Führer's edition), who has remarks to make on some of  
the other horses too.

The feminine form, tittirikalmaa.sii (describing a mare?) is mentioned  
in the Vaakyapadiiya.



Dominic Goodall
Pondicherry Centre,
Ecole française d'Extrême-Orient ("French School of Asian Studies"),
P.O. Box 151,
16 & 19, Dumas Street,
Pondicherry 605001


On 16 Mar 2009, at 16:01, Stella Sandahl wrote:

> MBh. 22.54.22 says: azvAMs tittiri-kalmASAn gandharvAn ... dadau  
> CitrarathaH...
> It seems to be that tittiri, kalmASa and gandharva could refer to  
> different breeds/kinds of horses. Renou understood it that way  
> (Anthologie sanscrite),
> but he gives no reference to support this.
> Nakula's AzvaZAstra (Thanjavur Sarasvati Mahal Series No. 56)  has  
> no reference to breeds of horses either as far as I can discover.
> So where can one find a clarification? Many thanks!
> Stella Sandahl
>
>
> --
> Professor Stella Sandahl
> Department of East Asian Studies
> 130 St. George St. room 14087
> Toronto, ON M5S 3H1
> ssandahl at sympatico.ca
> stella.sandahl at utoronto.ca
> Tel. (416) 978-4295
> Fax. (416) 978-5711