*3.2.3. The Apabhram. sa Verses ´*

As mentioned earlier, a critical edition of all the Apabhram. sa verses in the ´ *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, along with their Tibetan translation, was published by Chaudhuri (1935).<sup>89</sup> Chaudhuri summarized the Apabhram. sa used in the ´ *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* as "an artificial one based on the Saurasen ´ ¯ı Apabhram. sa," being "influenced by Sanskrit ´ and the literary Prakrits of the second MIA period," and including elements of "many Bengali words and expressions" and "East Bengal dialect". Chaudhuri also analyzed the phonology, morphology, and prosody of the form of Apabhram. sa´ used in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* in detail.90 I do not repeat them here. The verses used in *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* 15 are *apsarovilasita* (15.25-26 in my edition), *anangalalit ˙ a¯* (15.27), *ary ¯ a¯* (15.28), *manmathavilasita* (15.286), and *pad¯ akulaka ¯* (15.287).

The new edition of the Apabhram. sa verses of the ´ *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* 15, along with their Tibetan and English translations, which I present here, is based on the same Sanskrit manuscripts and Tibetan translations of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* and the same Sanskrit manuscripts of the related texts that I mentioned earlier. I have also consulted much of Chaudhuri's edition and his analysis of the language. However, there are some instances where I do not agree with Chaudhuri: the new edition is slightly different from Chaudhuri's. In the critical apparatus, I have provided the standard Sanskrit forms of the Apabhram. sa words (e.g., "jagaï (for jagat ´ ¯ı or jagati)," 15.25a), and have also noted Chaudhuri's text and his *chay¯ a¯* (Sanskrit gloss).

<sup>87</sup> See also the "extension of a word by addition of a syllable into the middle" mentioned in Chapter 3.2.1 in this monograph, which is an example of adding a short syllable to accommodate the meter.

<sup>88</sup> (Schott 2019, p. 149).

<sup>89</sup> Chaudhuri's edition of the Apabhram. sa verses in ´ *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* 15 is presented in (Chaudhuri 1935, pp. 136–40). In this monograph, I have not used (S´astr ¯ ¯ı 1915)'s text.

<sup>90</sup> (Chaudhuri 1935, pp. 19–34). See also Chapter 2 in this monograph.

#### **3.3. Editorial Conventions**

As mentioned earlier, in the main text, the words that are peculiar morphologically or orthographically are indicated by underlines (e.g., " -bhujasyam ¯ . "). When any word/letter in manuscript A is emended, or when any word/letter that is illegible in manuscript A is restored from other sources, I have represented all emended or restored words/letters in bold (e.g., "savya¯**vasavyato**"). See also the last paragraph in Chapter 3.2.1 for details. The same policy is applied to the edition of the Tibetan text. When any word/letter in D 372 (base text) is emended, or when any word/letter that is illegible in D 372 is restored from other sources, I have represented all emended or restored words/letters in bold (e.g., "**'jig pa** la sogs").

Signs that I have used for the critical apparatus (both in Sanskrit and Tibetan texts) are as follows:


#### ♦ separates comments on different words

In the footnotes, I have marked the accepted reading with a lemma sign ']'. This is followed by information on variant readings and the reason for my decision. For example, "-nurodhena ] ABCDpc (rjes su bskul ba yis Tib); nudhena Dac" (15.29a) means: "I have accepted A, B, C, and Dpc's reading of *nurodhena*; I have not accepted Dac's reading of *nudhena*; and the Tibetan translation *rjes su bskul ba yis* is in accordance with the accepted reading."

As mentioned previously, Jayasena's *Ratnapadmaraganidhi ¯* , Ratnasena's *Man. d. alarcanavidhi ¯* , and the *Var¯ ah¯ ¯ıkalpa* (which are indicated as J, R, and V in the critical apparatus, respectively) have many parallel passages. They also teach the Heruka man. d. ala. However, some of the man. d. ala deities' names are different from those taught in the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*. To clearly show how the man. d. ala deities' names were transmitted from the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava* to these texts, I made notes of the readings of the man. d. ala deities' names in the Sanskrit manuscripts or Tibetan translations of these texts, as well as the readings in the Sanskrit manuscripts of the *D. ak¯ ar¯ n. ava*, in all critical apparatuses of the man. d. ala deities' names.

Editorial decisions were made regarding the division of verses. The punctuation marks used are *dan. d. a*s (and double *dan. d. a*s in verses) in the Sanskrit text, and *shad*s and double *shad*s in the Tibetan text. I have not reported conventional *dan. d. a*s. Orthographical variants that I have not reported are the gemination of consonants after -*r* and degemination of *t* before *-r* and *-v*. However, when they appear in the apparatus, I have noted them. I have not standardized the word-final *-m.* , *-n˙* (before the initial *k-*class consonants), *-ñ* (before the initial *c-*class consonants), *-n.* (before the initial *t.-*class consonants), *-n* (before the initial *t-*class consonants), and *-m* (before the initial *p-*class consonants) and have preserved the forms in manuscript A.
