From what I have seen of the Anandashram Printing Press and other printing presses in the vicinity of where I grew up in Pune, after printing a certain number of copies of a book, and occasionally not even the whole book, but a few forms containing a certain number of pages, they had to disassemble the metal type to be used to re typeset the next batch of pages.  I have seen the tasks of assembling a page letter by letter, and then disassembling it letter by letter.  This had to do with the cost of purchasing the metal type sets and storing them for repeated use.  The press at the Bhandarkar Institute was of a similar kind.  I have heard discussions at the BORI about photographic reprinting of books and this involved the matter of firing the old printing press staff etc.  These were difficult decisions for institutions like the Anandashram and the BORI, and the changes came only slowly.  At some point, I remember that Professor K.S. Arjunwadkar started a business of computer typesetting called ज्ञानमुद्रा within the building of Anandashram, and then he slowly helped the Anandashram itself to usher into a technology change, including photographic reprinting and photographing the manuscripts of the institution.  The old leadership of these institutions like Professor R.N. Dandekar was unfamiliar with the new technologies, and took a long time to go for it.  I was a witness for the introduction of the first PC at the BORI, as I was staying at the guesthouse of the BORI and had a laptop and a printer in my room.  One day, Professors Dandekar, Ghatage and Mehendale all came to my guesthouse room to see for themselves what this thing called a computer was and what it could do.  I was myself just getting used to this technology, but had by then designed my first Devanagari fonts using the Chi-Writer software for PCs.  The question that these professors asked me was if the computer could interpret the Sanskrit texts for them, and when I said that it could not, they said that it was of no use to them.  I am recounting this story just to say that change in technology came very slowly to these deeply entrenched institutions.

Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor Emeritus, Sanskrit and Linguistics
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Senior Fellow, Oxford Center for Hindu Studies

[Residence: Campbell, California, USA]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 1:40 PM Elliot Stern via INDOLOGY <> wrote:
Johannes is right. I have a physical set of the 2nd printing of Mīmāṃsādarśana in the Anandasrama series (various years, mostly or all in the 1970s). The pagination is different from the in the 1st printing. There are also new errors in the 2nd printing.

I wonder why they reset type as late as the 1970s when some sort of photographic copying of the first printing books would have been possible.

Happily, most or all of the first printing is available at

Elliot Stern 

On Jul 17, 2020, at 3:59 PM, Johannes Bronkhorst via INDOLOGY <> wrote:

Dear colleagues,


Allen Thrasher put the following message on Indology (14.6.2017): "Jim Nye of the University of Chicago Library told me that when Anandasrama did a second edition of the same work it would start from scratch, so that another ASS edition of the same title will be a different text." I have meanwhile found that this appears to be true of its editions of the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha.

I have inspected two Ānandāśrama editions of the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha:

(1) one published in 1950;


(2) one published in 1977.

Both are no. 51 in the series called Ānandāśramasaṃskṛtagranthāvali, and both also include Madhusūdana Sarasvatī's Prasthānabheda. According to the title pages, edition (1) is the third impression (aṅkanāvṛtti), edition (2) the fourth. Edition (1) has been prepared (saṃśodhita) by Vināyaka Gaṇeśa Āpaṭe with the help of the Pandits of the Ānandāśrama; edition (2) only by the Pandits of the Ānandāśrama. The text of the Sarvadarśanasaṃgraha covers 171 pages in edition (1); 174 pages in edition (2). Both editions contain the same list of manuscripts (ādarśapustakollekhapatrikā; edition (2) contains its first mistake in this list, misnaming ms. gha as ba) and the same list of chapters (edition (1) calls it atha sarvadarśanasaṃgrahāntargatadarśanānām anukramaḥ; edition (2) calls is anukramaṇikā). Edition (1) then has a preface to the second impression (dvitīyāvṛttisaṃbandhi nivedanam) and an introduction (upodghāta); edition (2) has neither of these two.

The two editions are not identical. For example, edition (1) has, on p. 128 l. 15: prasajyeteti cet na; edition (2) (p. 130 l. 15) has just prasajyeta. Numerous other examples could no doubt be added.

Interestingly, the editors of Erich Frauwallner's Nachgelassene Werke II (Wien 1992) thought that Frauwallner had used the Ānandāśrama edition of 1977 (abbreviation: SDS1) for his translation of parts of the chapter on Śaṅkara's philosophy (along with Abhyankar's edition), which is of course impossible (Frauwallner died in 1974). This sometimes leads to confusion, as when the editors point out on p. 200 fn. 108 that the last pāda of a śloka in the 1977 Ānandāśrama edition (p. 152 l. 22) "erscheint ... nur verstümmelt"; this is true, but this pāda is perfectly in order in the 1950 edition (p. 150 l. 12).


Johannes Bronkhorst

INDOLOGY mailing list (messages to the list's managing committee) (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)

Elliot M. Stern
552 South 48th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19143-2029

INDOLOGY mailing list (messages to the list's managing committee) (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)