BPHS various editions (by Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary)

[Guest guest]

Dear All, The following article is from: http://jyotish-blog.blogspot.com/2005_02_01_archive.html Love and regards,Sreenadh================================

BPHS various editions by Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary

 

 

BPHS various editions

 

by Dr Satya Prakash Choudhary

I will give a quick history of BPHS in modern times (its published

history), without going into other things. I don't know which

*Varanasi* edition Sri K. N. Rao is referring to. It has to be

either the second or third in my list. I will not refer to the

English translations or other regional ones because most of these

texts follow one or more of the following as these are among the

first published ones in any language.

 

 

1. The earliest *published* edition of BPHS

is 'BrihatParasaraHoraSaramsa' with Sridhara pandita's Sanskrit and

Hindi commentary. Published by Venkateswara Steam Press, Bombay.

(don't know its first publication date. I could procure a xerox copy

of the second edition dated 1951)

 

Subsequently three editions with Hindi commentary were published.

 

2. Sri Sitaram Jhoo's Hindi commentary ('Brihat Parasara Hora')

published by Master Kheladilal & Sons, Varanasi (published 1946)

 

3. Sri Devachandra Jhoo's Hindi commentary ('Brihat Parasara Hora')

published by Chowkamba Vidya Bhavan, Varanasi

 

4. Sri Ganesadatta Pathak's Hindi commentary published by Thakur

Prasad Pustak Bhandar.

 

These four are generally the main editions used by scholars in

comparing various editions.

 

 

Of these Sridhara's and Ganesadatta's versions are nearly similar

while the other two are similar in meaning, though there are

differences in the words used here and there.

 

Number of chapters in various editions:

 

While Sridhara Pandita's edition refers to 100 chapters (80 in

Poorvabhaga and 20 in Uttarabhaga) in the chapter 'Adhyayana krama'

(70th chapter in this edition) , the actual text itself has only

51+20= 71.

 

The Sitaram Jhoo edition has 91 chapters while Devachandra Jhoo

edition has 98 chapters.

 

It goes without saying that the order of chapters as well as content

to some extent, differ in these various editions. Discounting the

differences in words as long as the meaning/content remains similar,

I could say that Devachandra Jhoo edition has three additional

chapters.

 

a. Grahadisadhanadhyaya

b. Sutikadhyaya

c. Prasnadhyaya

 

The above three figure as chapters 4,9 and 84 in this edition.

 

The 'Avatarakathanadhyaya' is not part of both Sridharapandita's and

Ganesadatta's editions as also quite a few chapters. As you know,

this chapter deals with the ten avatars of Lord Vishnu and the

grahas.

 

 

Good news is that the so called Jaimini topics are part of all four

editions. Either Jaimini principles were already integrated into

Parasara's texts or they have always been part and parcel of what

goes by Parasara's name (I know that Narasimha strongly supports the

latter case). Unless an older version of the BPHS surfaces and this

version doesn't have the so called Jaimini topics, the ground for

the latter contention (that Jaimini is part of Parasara) shall

remain reasonably strong.

 

 

Inspite of the other differences, one thing might be possible (my

own speculation). The versions with 71 and 60 chapters are largely

similar in their contents and could perhaps be based on *older*

versions. The other two versions might have more

interpolations/alterations. This apart, all four could (in all

probability) probably be surviving traditions of BPHS with

alterations. One thing seems to be sure. There definetely is NO way

of concluding anything as Parasara's own words in HIS own language

as all editions have differences in language (words) at times.

 

 

I am deliberately refraining from writing more so as to avoid

unnecessary controversies. I am not against a scholarly debate on

this topic, but recognize the limitations of a group like this. All

debate/discussion can occur only between individuals who have gone

through all the editions and also have a good idea of the historical

rise and fal of various religious, cultural and intellectual

movements in Indian history as one can infer these indirectly in the

language used. For instance what does the Pancaratra agama leaning

of the author(s) (in certain chapters) suggest? That these versions

are post-pancaratra agama rise?

 

 

What are the possible inferences of certain Greek terms in the texts

such as Kendra, Panaphara, Apoklima, Sunapha, Anaphara, Dauradhura,

Kemadruma suggest? (esp against the background that it is hard to

find the Sanskrit root for some of these words!)Quite a few

possibilities exist here. Either the surviving versions are all

altered after the Yavanas exerted their influence on Hindu Jataka?

Or does one have to take this to even older times? Did Parasara

write anything at all? Or did Parasara's teachings survive through

successions of disciples who compiled the BPHS after considerable

time gaps? And has this original version been changed over a period

of time and hence none of the contents can be used for QUOTING

Parasara's opinion? It is good to explore various possibilities as

long as one remains intellectually honest and is willing to give up

favourite prejudices. This is the hardest one to overcome as

personal prejudices (religious, regional, intellectual,etc) can work

both consciously and unconsciously at an emotional level.

 

 

Perhaps it is good to take the ESSENCE of the text and not

everything literally. Afterall we are not dealing with the Veda

Samhita or Sruti. We are dealing with sastra.

 

Though there are knowledgeable people/scholars here, this list is

certainly not the place to have a major discussion/debate as there

are people at all levels.

 

 

Regards,

Satya Prakash

 

Post-script: Isn't it amusing when people quote a verse from

Parasara giving the chapter and sloka to support themselves (as if

only one edition/version existed)? Which edition are they referring

to? Most often it is the English translation published by either

Ranjan or Sagar. And then how many are aware that the two parts of

Ranjan publications BPHS in English have been translated by two

different people? The first part has been translated by Sri

Santhanam and the second one by one Gowri Shankar Kapoor (which I

think has been lifted from an earlier edition in Hindi). The Sagar

publications edition in English has been translated by Sri Girish

Chandra Sarma

================================