% Mahabharata: General information % Last updated: Fri Sep 25 2020 % Encoding: Unicode Devanagari % Electronic text (C) Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, % Pune, India, 1999 % ================================== Electronic text of the Mahabharata ================================== This file contains information about the electronic text of the Mahabharata. Anyone who intends to make use of the text is asked to read it carefully. It is divided into four sections: * The status of the electronic text * The history of the electronic text * The format of the electronic text * Notes on the electronic text John D. Smith University of Cambridge ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The status of the electronic text ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The electronic text of the Mahabharata is Copyright (C) The Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI), Pune. This authorised and regularly updated text is available only via the web page http://bombay.indology.info/mahabharata/statement.html. Please do not provide copies of the text to others. The text is as accurate as possible, but errors may well still appear. If you believe you have found an error, please report it by email to Suvarna Deshpande (suvarnad09 [at] gmail.com) or Pranav Gokhale (pranavpg88 [at] gmail.com). Before reporting any error, please read the rest of this document! Corrections will be made to errors remaining in the text as they come to light. Check the “Last updated” date at the head of each parvan against the current dates listed on the distribution website (URL https://bombay.indology.info/mahabharata/welcome.html) to see whether you need to download newer versions. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The history of the electronic text ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This text has its origins in the work of Prof. Muneo Tokunaga of the University of Kyoto. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, Prof. Tokunaga typed the entire text of the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata (BORI, 1933-66) into a computer, and in 1994 he placed the electronic text he had thus created on the Internet. The enormity of the labour involved in the creation of the text is matched only by Prof. Tokunaga's generosity in making it so freely available to the scholarly world. This version of the text derives ultimately from that first version, and I am deeply grateful to Prof. Tokunaga for permitting this use of the products of his labour. In transcribing the Mahabharata, Prof. Tokunaga took a number of policy decisions which can cause difficulties for would-be users whose requirements differ from his. Most of these -- for example, his use of “m” for both m and anusvara, and “n” for the dental, palatal and velar nasals -- can be overcome with a little effort. Much the most serious problem is caused by his use of a single separator to divide word from word and compound-member from compound-member (something he did not do in his transcription of the Ramayana). The result is that, for example, the Gita begins , not धर्मक्षेत्रे कुरुक्षेत्रे. In 1995 I devised a method which I believed would allow me to rejoin a significant percentage of these “split” compounds. It involved using a computer to analyse differences between substantial passages of Mahabharata text before and after full “correction” by hand. In this way the computer could learn to recognise large numbers of typical split compounds, and could therefore be used to correct them wherever they occurred in the text as a whole. Applying this method over a period of months led to the elimination of perhaps 75% of the split compounds occurring in the electronic text; I also made large numbers of corrections of other kinds. Then, like Prof. Tokunaga before me, I made the resulting text available via the Internet; I also began to make use of it in my own scholarly work. However, this kept its remaining deficiencies all too permanently before my eyes, and I determined to find a way of bringing the text to (notional) perfection. With the aid of generous funding from the Humanities Research Board of the British Academy, the Society for South Asian Studies and the Smuts Memorial Fund (University of Cambridge), I was able to set up a project at BORI to achieve this goal. A team of five assistants -- Indu Deshpande, Kirti Sharad Thakar, Pradnya Anant Rayrikar, Samita Vasant Shinde and Shilpa Mulay -- were employed to work through the entire text correcting any split compounds or other errors they encountered. The task was done throughout in duplicate, so that slips made by one assistant would show up through comparison with the work of another. I was responsible for collating the results, which form the basis of this electronic text. For their dedicated work, and the levels of accuracy that they have brought to a long and demanding task, the members of the team, like Prof. Tokunaga himself, have earned the gratitude of all those who make use of the electronic Mahabharata. My own gratitude goes in addition to Prof. Saroja Bhate, without whose help the project would never have reached such successful results. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The format of the electronic text ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1. Line-numbers --------------- The text is divided into eighteen files, one per main book (पर्वन्) of the Mahabharata. However, the format of each line is such as to identify it uniquely, whichever file it happens to come from. At the start of every line appears a nine-character line-number specifying the book or पर्वन् (two digits), the chapter or अध्याय (three digits), the verse or श्लोक (three digits), and the quarter-verse or पाद (one letter, specifying the first of the two पादs that form each line). Thus the first line of the Gita appears as: 06023001a धर्मक्षेत्रे कुरुक्षेत्रे समवेता युयुत्सवः indicating that it represents पादs a and b of the first verse of book 6, chapter 23. If the line is part of a verse in त्रिष्टुभ् or other longer metre, the division between the पादs is marked with a semicolon: 01001065a दुर्योधनो मन्युमयो महाद्रुमः; स्कन्धः कर्णः शकुनिस्तस्य शाखाः If the line is part of a passage in prose, the final letter of the line-number (which normally indicates the पाद) is capitalised: 01003001A जनमेजयः पारिक्षितः सह भ्रातृभिः कुरुक्षेत्रे दीर्घसत्रमुपास्ते If the line is a header such as जनमेजय उवाच, the final letter of the line-number is replaced by a space: 01045003 जनमेजय उवाच 2. Encodings ------------ The text is available in three encodings (character sets) commonly used for Sanskrit and other Indian languages: Unicode Devanagari, Unicode Roman (using the conventions defined in ISO 15919), and ASCII (using the Harvard/Kyoto conventions). 3. Spelling conventions ----------------------- It is impossible to achieve complete consistency in a text as large and diverse as the Mahabharata, especially when it was edited over 33 years by several different scholars from a vast range of manuscript sources. So, for example, the spellings द्वंद्व and द्वन्द्व both appear in several books. No serious attempt at normalisation of spelling has been made in the electronic text, but some consistency in purely editorial matters is clearly desirable, especially given that people will wish to search the entire text for words and phrases. The following rules have been applied, which may introduce minor changes from the text as printed; the words छत्र etc. raise a particular problem which is addressed in some detail below. General rules +++++++++++++ Forms such as किं चित् (/चन/अपि) are everywhere spelt as two words in Roman representations of the electronic text (assuming that sandhi does not prevent this, as in कापि), whatever the usage in the printed text; similarly किं स्वित्, etc. The word कच्चित् of course is unchanged, as are compounded forms such as किंचिच्छेष “having little left remaining”. In the Devanagari versions of the text, forms such as किंचित् are spelt as single words to respect normal usage in Indian scripts. The phrase अथ वा is always written as two words. The same applies to periphrastic perfects: कथयां बभूव, etc. Use of the word-internal अवग्रह in forms such as यशोऽर्थ is not entirely consistent in the printed text (e.g. यशोऽर्थं 7.86.20c but यशोर्थम् 8.29.25b). The Errata to Book 1 contain five such cases, in all of which Sukthankar requests the deletion of the अवग्रह (he missed a single further case at 1.115.11d). Arguments could be mounted against this practice, but the editorial intention is very clear, and the internal अवग्रह has been removed in the few cases where it does appear. An effort has been made to standardise the use of double अवग्रह in cases where the elided vowel is not अ but आ. This is the normal usage in the printed text, but there are a few cases where single अवग्रह appears instead; the electronic text corrects these. The words कार्त्तिक, कार्त्तिकेय, etc., are for the most part spelt with double “t” in the Critical Edition, but there are some occurrences of “कार्तिक” and “कार्तिकेय”. These have been silently normalised in the electronic text. Similarly, the absolutive छित्त्वा is occasionally spelt with a single “t”: such occurrences have been normalised to the correct form. The words छत्र, सत्र and पत्र +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The words छत्र, सत्र and पत्र are spelt inconsistently in the Critical Edition: some editors favoured the spelling with single “t”, others that with double “tt”. It appeared undesirable to leave such inconsistency in place, and all three words are uniformly spelt with single “t” in the electronic text. This applies also to derivative forms in -in, etc. The choice of single over double “t” reflects the overall weight of opinion amongst the editors: this appeared a more important criterion than any questions of etymological “correctness”. Note, however, that the word तोत्त्र is spelt with double “t”, since the Critical Edition is entirely consistent in spelling it thus at every occurrence. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Notes on the electronic text ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Occasionally the electronic text corrects an error in the printed edition. The following is a complete list of such corrections: each line is quoted as it is actually printed, followed by a comment explaining the correction. (In a few cases a possible correction is noted that has not in fact been implemented.) Note that changes made purely to adhere to the spelling conventions listed above are not included. Note also that all corrections included in the printed edition's various lists of errata, etc., have been applied to the electronic text: they too are not referred to here. In these notes, “PAE” refers to Phillip Ernest, who has spent many hours checking problematical readings in manuscripts used in the preparation of the Critical Edition and still available for consultation at BORI. Thanks to his efforts it has been possible to establish beyond doubt that certain puzzling readings found in the printed edition are simple typographic errors. 01001046a भूतस्थानानि सर्वाणि रहस्यं विविधं च यत् The first printing of Book 1 (in separate fascicules) has त्रिविधं here, but in the second printing (in bound form) this has been replaced by विविधं. Since विविधं is also quoted as a variant reading, it is clear that it is the latter form which is a typographic error. I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for drawing my attention to this problem. 01001174c अजेयः परशुः पुण्ड्रः शम्भुर्देवावृधोऽनघः This is the only occurrence of the word शम्भु- spelt with nasal “m” rather than अनुस्वार. The spelling with अनुस्वार occurs seventeen times, including an occurrence later in Book 1 (01058043c). It is clear that this was the spelling preferred by Sukthankar and the other editors, and I have restored it in this one discrepant instance. I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for drawing my attention to this problem. 01058043a तमुवाच महाराज भूमिं भूमिपतिर्विभुः It is certain that तम् is a typographic error for ताम्. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K0, Da1 and D1 all have ताम् (PAE). 01179009a केजिदाहुर्युवा श्रीमान्नागराजकरोपमः 02024018c उरगावासिनं चैव रोचमानं रणेऽजयत् See the Supplementary Addenda, p. 515. 05032014c विरोचतेऽहार्यवृत्तेन वीरो; युधिष्ठिरस्त्वयि पापं विसृज्य See the note on p. 726 of the edition. 05070042c प्रशान्ताः समभूताश्च श्रियं तानश्नुवीमहि It is certain that तान् is a typographic error for ताम्. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K1, Ds1 and D5 all have ताम् (PAE). 07005034c त्रैय्यम्बकमथेष्वस्त्रमस्त्राणि विविधानि च त्रैय्यंबकम् is also quoted as a variant reading. 07035011a तमुदीक्ष्य तथा यान्तं सर्वे द्रोणपुरोगमाः “Coming” rather than “going” is necessary for the sense here. 07053014c उत्सहन्तेऽन्यथाकर्तुं प्रतिज्ञां सव्यसाचिनः Monier Williams allows अन्यथा-कृ- as a compound verb, but all the other ten occurrences of अन्यथा + verbal form of कृ- in the Mahabharata (01003133B, 01091013c, 03131015c, 03205010a, 05081053a, 07052011c, 07172048a, 13043025a, 13047036a, 16009027c) are printed as non-compounds. Of these, seven consist of अन्यथा कर्तुम्, including two further occurrences of the पाद-phrase उत्सहन्ते ऽन्यथा कर्तुम्, one in the previous chapter (07052011c), the other later in the same parvan (07172048a). I am therefore preferring the non-compounded form. 07054005c प्रतिस्रोतःप्रवृत्ताश्च तथा गन्तुं समुद्रगाः Clearly a typographic error (cf. the almost identical 07167002c: प्रतिस्रोतः प्रवृत्ताश्च गन्तुं तत्र समुद्रगाः). 07054010a स्नुषा श्वश्व्रानघायस्ते विशोके कुरु माधव 07070037c सहसेनः सहामात्यो द्रापदेयानवारयत् 07076029a इति कृष्णा महेष्वासौ यशसा लोकविश्रुतौ 07079025c भूरिश्रवास्त्रिभिर्बाणैर्हेमपुङ्खः शिलाशितैः 07085021c अभ्यवर्षञ्शरैस्तीक्ष्णैः कङ्कबर्हिणवाजितः 07120069e अदृश्यौ च शरोघैस्तौ निघ्नतामितरेतरम् 07164037a तं सात्यकिः प्रत्यविद्धत्तथैव दशभिः शरैः It is certain that प्रत्यविद्धत् is a typographic error for प्रत्यविध्यत्. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts Dc1 and D6 both have प्रत्यविध्यत् (PAE). 07165044c महिमानं महाराज योगमुक्तस्य गच्छतः It is certain that योगमुक्तस्य is a typographic error for योगयुक्तस्य. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition, P. S. S. Sastri's edition of the southern recension and manuscripts Dc1, D5 and D7 all have योगयुक्तस्य (PAE). 07165055c पलायनकृतोत्साहा दुद्रुवुः सर्वतो दिशम् 08031004c युधिष्ठिरं चाभिभवन्नसपव्यं चकार ह It is certain that असपव्यं is a typographic error for अपसव्यं. The editor records no significant variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K1, D4 and D8 all have अपसव्यं (PAE). 08062047c स वाजिसूतेष्वसनस्तथापत;द्यथा महावातहतो महाद्रुमः The line is unconstruable unless the initial स is taken as part of the following compound. 08065014c अथाब्रवीत्पाणिना पाणिमाघ्न;न्संदष्टाष्ठो नृत्यति वादयन्निव 08069017a यः स द्यूतजितां कृष्णां प्राह सत्पुरुषाधमः I believe this is a rather celebrated case, and I am grateful to Saroja Bhate for directing my attention to it. 09001052c समाश्वासयत क्षत्ता वचसा मधुरेण ह See Critical Notes. 09006023a एतच्छ्रुत्वा यथाभूतं कुरु माधव यत्क्षमम् See Critical Notes. 09016058e संन्यस्तकवचा देहैर्विपत्रायुधजीविताः This line has been reproduced unchanged as it appears in the printed edition; however, it seems likely that विपत्रायुधजीविताः is a typographic error for विपन्नायुधजीविताः, the reading found in the Bombay Edition and the manuscript D10. This reading is not recorded by the editor (though he does record other variants beginning with विपन्ना-). However, manuscript K2 does read विपत्रायुधजीविताः, so I do not feel justified in modifying the printed text. Manuscript information from PAE. 09018062c पुनरेवान्वर्तन्त पाण्डवानाततायिनः 10001050c श्लौकौ न्यायमवेक्षद्भिस्तत्त्वार्थं तत्त्वदर्शिभिः 11008039a भवान्कर्मपरो यत्र बुद्धिश्रेष्ठश्च भारत It is certain that कर्मपरो is a typographic error for धर्मपरो, as suggested by James L. Fitzgerald (The Mahabharata translated, vol. 7, Chicago and London, 2004, pp. 666-7). The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K1, K2 and D3 all have धर्मपरो (PAE). 12047006a एतैश्चान्यैर्मुनिगणर्महाभागैर्महात्मभिः 12089018a स्थानान्येतानि संगम्य प्रसङ्गे भूतिनाशनः This line has been reproduced unchanged as it appears in the printed edition; however, James L. Fitzgerald (The Mahabharata translated, vol. 7, Chicago and London, 2004, p. 740) suggests that प्रसङ्गे is an error for प्रसङ्गो. noting that this is the reading of the Citrasālā edition, but that no variants are recorded by the editor. It is also the reading of the Bombay Edition and manuscripts Da1 and Da2; however, manuscript K1 does read प्रसङ्गे, so I do not feel justified in modifying the printed text. Manuscript information from PAE. 12155004c तपसैव हि सिध्यन्ति तपो मूलं हि साधनम् I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for pointing out this error (तपोमूलं must be a बहुव्रीहि compound meaning “having asceticism for its basis”). 12244011a व्यवसायात्मिका बुद्धिर्मनोव्याकरणात्मकम् I am grateful to Kirti Sharad Thakar for pointing out this error. 12291043c योऽहं सोहऽमिति ह्युक्त्वा गुणाननु निवर्तते 12292027c दिवसान्ते गुणानेतानभ्येत्यैकोवतिष्ठति 12309024c ऋत्वास्यः समबलशुक्लकृष्णनेत्रो; मांसाङ्गो द्रवति वयोहयो नराणाम् It is certain that मांसाङ्गो is a typographic error for मासाङ्गो. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay and Kumbakonam editions and manuscripts K1 and D4 all have मासाङ्गो (PAE). I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for pointing out this error. 12319002c पादात्प्रभृतिगात्रेषु क्रमेण क्रमयोगवित् I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for pointing out this error (प्रभृति when governed by the ablative पादात् must be an independent word). 12323057e परां गतिमनुप्राप्त इति नैष्ठिकमज्जसा 12324024c न क्षुत्पिपासे राजेन्द्र भूमेश्च्छिद्रे भविष्यतः 12331030a श्वेतदीपे मया दृष्टास्तादृशावृषिसत्तमौ 12331035c श्वेतदीपे त्वया दृष्ट आवयोः प्रकृतिः परा I am grateful to James L. Fitzgerald for pointing out this error. 12334014c एकान्तिनां शरणदोऽभयदो गतिदोऽस्तु वः; स मखभागहरस्त्रिगुणातिगः 12334015a चतुष्पञ्चधरः पूर्ते;ष्टयोश्च फलभागहरः I am grateful to Kirti Sharad Thakar and Samita Vasant Shinde for correcting what must be an editorial slip in the division of the text into पादs. The critical note says, “Very probably एकान्तिनां is a marginalia for वः and should not be regarded as part of the line”; however, the version adopted in the electronic text is clearly preferable. 12338005a इदं पुरुषसुक्तं हि सर्ववेदेषु पार्थिव 12342008c प्रोवाच वचनं श्लष्णं प्राज्ञो मधुरया गिरा 13016013a स दृष्ट्ववान्महादेवमस्तौषीच्च स्तवैर्विभुम् 13023006a न ब्राह्मणः साधयते हव्यं दैवात्प्रसिद्ध्यति 13027098c भजेद्वाचा मनसा कर्मणा च; भक्त्या युक्तः परया श्रद्धधानः 13028022a ततः संतापयामास बिबुधांस्तपसान्वितः 13059005a म्रियते याचमानो वै तमनु म्रियते ददत् This line has been reproduced unchanged as it appears in the printed text; however, it seems likely that the final word should appear as ऽददत्. 13061025a पितृंश्च पितृलोकस्थान्देवलोके च देवताः 13076007c क्लैशैर्विप्रं योऽफलैः संयुनक्ति; तस्यावीर्याश्चाफलाश्चैव लोकाः 13091001c भृग्वङ्गरसके काले मुनिना कतरेण वा 13101024c पितॄणां मानुषाणां च कान्तायास्त्वनुपूर्वशः 13110062a कलहंसविनिर्घोषैर्नूपूराणां च निस्वनैः 13125022c न भाति कालेऽभिहितं तेनासि हरिण कृशः 13134027c प्रवक्तॄन्पृच्छते योऽन्यान्स वै ना पदमर्च्छति This line has been reproduced unchanged as it appears in the printed text; however, as the editor's critical note observes, “नापदम्, that is (for ना पदम्) is certainly more natural”. 14011010a व्याप्तास्वथासु वृत्रेण रसे च विषये हृते 14017035e तच्छ्रुत्वा नैष्ठिकीं बुद्धिं बुद्ध्येथाः कर्मनिश्चयात् 15005006a यच्चाहं पाण्डुपुत्रेण गुणवत्सु महात्मसु It is certain that पाण्डुपुत्रेण is a typographic error for पाण्डुपुत्रेषु. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition, P. S. S. Sastri's edition of the southern recension and manuscripts K3, K4 and D9 all have पाण्डुपुत्रेषु (PAE). 15033012a इयं च माता ज्येष्ठा मे वीतवाताध्वकर्शिता It is certain that वीतवाताध्वकर्शिता is a typographic error for शीतवाताध्वकर्शिता. The editor records no variant readings for वीत-, and yet the Bombay Edition, P. S. S. Sastri's edition of the southern recension and manuscripts K3, K4 and D9 all have शीतवाताध्वकर्शिता (PAE). 15044008a मा स्म शोके मनः कार्षीर्दिष्टेन व्यथते बुधः The sense demands दिष्टे न. 15044039c गम्यतां पुत्र मैव त्वं वोचः कुरु वचो मम It is certain that मैव is a typographic error for मैवं. The editor records no significant variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K3, K4 and D9 all have मैवं (PAE). 16004004c ते सागरस्योपरिष्ठादवर्त;न्मनोजवाश्चतुरो वाजिमुख्याः 16008039a तत्सागरसमप्रख्यं वृष्णिचक्रं महर्धिमत् 16009012a पुनः पुनर्न मृश्यामि विनाशममितौजसाम् It is certain that मृश्यामि is a typographic error for मृष्यामि. The editor records no significant variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K3, K4 and D9 all have मृष्यामि (PAE). 17001011a मातृभिः सह धर्मात्मा कृत्वोदकमतन्द्रितः It is certain that मातृभिः is a typographic error for भ्रातृभिः. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K3, K4 and D9 all have भ्रातृभिः (PAE). 18001016c द्रौपद्याश्च परिक्लेशं न चिन्तयतुमर्हसि It is certain that चिन्तयतुम् is a typographic error for चिन्तयितुम्. The editor records no variant readings for the word, and yet the Bombay Edition and manuscripts K3, K4 and D8 all have चिन्तयितुम् (PAE).