9058009412

DR. TELANG’S CONTRIBUTION TO SANSKRJT 207

also pointed out that it is morę plausible that ideas in the AdikSvya have traveiled to the country of Homer. He proved that the Ramayana was older than Patafijali. In answering Weber, Telang had shown his ability to handle geographical and a astronomical references. In his essay on the datę of Madhusudana SarasvatT, the author of Gita gudhartha -candrika he combated the views of Lassen and Bumof and proved that the author belongs to the end of 15th as well as the beginning of 16th century A.D. in the reign of Aurangazeb, a view that is now confirmed by Dr. Gopinath Kaviraj in his book “Kashikee Saraswat Sadhana" (Hindi), published in 1960. In 1874, he wrote a paper contesting the theory of Prof. Lorinser regarding Gita that it was copied from Bibie. This was readily a precursor to his illuminating book on Gita with notes as well as its translation in English in blank verse. This essay, however, forms the introduction to metrical translation of the ‘Divine Lay* published in 1875.

This brings me to the books that he translated and annotated. He edited two works for the Bombay Sanskrit Series. His edition of Bhartrharfs Nitiśataka and Vairagyaiataka appearcd in 1885. In his Introduction to this book he has placed Bhartrhari towards the close of the first and the beginning of the second century A.D. by arranging all extemal and intemal evidence with the carcfulncss of a real research scholar expressing his difference of opinion with scholars of the East as well as West. True to a research scholar free from bias, he has frankiy admitted in the Introduction that he had misunderstood Dr. R.G. Bhandarkar and was in agreement with his views. He was not afraid of controverting Buddhistic flavour allcged to exist in these Satakas.

His edition of the famous Sanskrit drama Mudriraksasa appeared in 1884 although it was already prepared in 1875. In fact he was required to lay it aside, because of the olTcr from Max Miiller rcquesling him to collaborate in Sacrcd Books of the East Series, Volume V1U by preparing an edition of Dhagavad Gita, and the Sanatsujśtiy with translation and notes. Undoubtedly this was an honour confcrred on the only Indian scholar speaking volumes for the place that he had earned among the scholarly world purely on merit. In his Introduction of Mudr2r&ksasa he placed Vi£akhadatta in the beginning of 7th century A.D. and took care to mention with modesty that in his opinion no known fact of history is controvertcd by accepting the datę that he proposed. He was ccrtainly aware*of the inconclusivcness of dates of old Sanskrit words and gencrally agreed with Dr. Whitney’s remark in this connection.

It cannot be gainsaid that Telang’s famę rests mainly on his study of the Ramayana an<f the Gita wherein he successfully refuted the views of Weber and Dr. Lorinser. The former has been already dealt with. His blank verse translation of the GM contains his excelient Introduction wherein he disproved Prof. Lorinser’s view that Gita was copied from the Bibie, that it was afte*- Juddha and the composer of Gita used the New Testament.