My apologies for giving the wrong reference in the Padmapurāṇa, and my sincere thanks to Christophe for pointing this out. As I now see, the verse being asked about is actually Padma-purāṇa 5.106.22, which is not referenced in the verse-index in the Nag Publishers edition. This was found by Shankara and posted on the Bharatiya-Vidvat-Parisat list.

The verse that Madhav asked about is:

bāhumūlakucadvandvayonisparśanadarśanāt

kasya na skhalati cittaṃ retaḥ skannaṃ ca no bhavet


As found in the Veṅkaṭeśvara Press edition reprinted by Nag Publishers, Padma-purāṇa, Pāṭāla khaṇḍa (the 5th), adhyāya 106, verse 22, is:

bāhumūlakucadvaṃdvasvayonisparśadarśanāt

kasya na skhalate ceto retaḥ skannaṃ ca no bhavet


In the Ānandāśrama edition of the Padmapurāṇam (4 vols., 1893-1894), the Pāṭāla khaṇḍa is the 4th rather than the 5th khaṇḍa. Here this verse is found in adhyāya 102 rather than 106, but the verse number remains the same, 22. Verse 4.102.22 in this edition (vol. 2, 1894, p. 682) is:

bāhumūlakucadvaṃdvasvayonisparśadarśanāt

kasya na skhalate cittaṃ retaḥ skannaṃ ca no bhavet


The other verse that Dge-'dun-chos-'phel quotes here, susnigdhaṃ romarahitaṃ, etc., is 5.106.17 in the Veṅkaṭeśvara Press edition, and 4.102.17 in the Ānandāśrama edition.

Best regards,

David Reigle
Colorado, U.S.A.


On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:16 AM, Madhav Deshpande via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
Dear Matthew and Christophe,

     I should clarify that the original question regarding the source of these verses came from my colleague Don Lopez who is lookinf at this Tibetan work and is aware of Karen Lang's translations.

Madhav

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Matthew Kapstein via INDOLOGY <indology@list.indology.info> wrote:
Dear Madhav and Christophe,

Undoubtably Hopkins consulted his colleague Karen Lang about the verse and reports her response
to his query. He is not referring to her published work. I have no idea why he is speaking of
"Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit" here at all. The Tibetan author, Dge-'dun-chos-'phel, spent considerable
time in India and was a fair Sanskritist. But Tibetan publications of his writings often introduce
errors into his Sanskrit citations. This hardly qualifies them as BHS.

Matthew

Matthew Kapstein
Directeur d'études,
Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes

Numata Visiting Professor of Buddhist Studies,
The University of Chicago


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)


_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)