Apte, Vaman Shivaram, The practical Sanskrit-English dictionary

(Poona :  Shiralkar,  1890.)

Tools


 

Jump to page:

Table of Contents

  Page [1]  



PREFACE.

Tliis Dictionary has been undertaken to   sapply a want long  felt  by the sba iont^ of a complete
and at the same time cheap Sanskrit-Eaglish Dictionary.   Very little need,  I  thiak, be said   witk regard
to the necessity of  bringing out a work like this, when the study of Sinskrit has received suoh a strong
impetus during the last twenty.five years.    Tkere have been four or five Sanskrit-Eaglish Dictionaries   pub^
lished till now ; but very few of them fulfil the two essential conditions of the popularity anl usefulaess of
such works ;—satisfying all the requirements of students and at the same time beiag within their easy reach.
The Dictionaries of Professors Wilson and Monier Williams are very useful  and valuable works, but   their
prices—particularly of the latter—are prohibitively high, and they do not also meet many of the most ordinary-
wants of Sanskrit readers.    A student, while reading Sanskrit at School or College, generally expects that the
Dictionary which he uses will give appropriate equivalents for   such   words   and  compound expressious   as
may have peculiar meanings or shades of meaning in particular passages.    He desires to kuow not oaly   that
a particular word has so many senses, but that it has this or  that   sease in   a particular passage   of   a
book, so that he may determine any particular meaning of a word ia  a   cerbaia   passage    by seeing   and
comparing how it is used elsewhere by the same writer or by other writers ia different   works.    He also
wants   accurate   and, as far as possible, full explanations  of the more important technical   terms   occur¬
ring at least in his usual course reading, as well as any other information likely to be  of use  to kim.
Professor Monier Williams has, in his invaluable Dictionary, tried to exhaust the meanings of words as far as
lie could, and has also given much useful information on some points.   But it would not, I think, be detracting
from the merits of the great work to say that it fails to give some of the most common senses of words occur¬
ring in   such well-known and oft-read books as the   Uttarardmacharita,    Mudrdr^kshasa,   Ve^isamhara,
/Si^updlavadha or Kadambari,   Moreover it gives neither quotations nor references,   nor much   of the in«
formation likely to be useful to the student during his School  or   College   career.    In   making  these  re¬
marks I must not, in the slightest degree, be understood to make any reflections on that Dictionary. Indeed, I
have myself derived no small help from that work, as will be acknowledged further on.    My only object
in pointing   out  its defects has been to show   why I thought it necessary to   undertake the   compila¬
tion of a new Dictionary,  when some  already   existed in the   field,   and I hope the reader will be able
to find that this Dictionary is an improvement on its predecessors in some respects at least.

Having thus explained the necessity of undertaking and publishing this Dictionary^ I shall say a
few words with regard to its plan and scope. The extent of Sanskrit literature is so vast that not even the
life-long labours of a single individual, howsoever talented or persevering, will be able to do full justice to it.
It has two distinct branches, the Vedic and post-Vedic, each of which will require an independent encyclopaedia
for itself. Not even the gigantic V4>cha8pat]/a of the late Professor Tfi,ranatha Tarkavachas^pati, nor the
equally gigantic German Worterhuch of Drs. Roth and Bothlingk, can be said to be altogether complete and
comprehensive. Much less can a small work like mine—compiled during the leisure hours
of a teacher's life—aspire to be called complete in any sense of that word. However, I have
tried to make it as comprehensive and practically useful to the student of Sanskrit as
my humble powers enabled me to do, though how far I have succeeded in my object the reader alon^ can
best decide. It includes all words occurring in the general post-Vedic literature, such as Epics like
the Eamayaigia and Mahabbaijata, the several Puriii?.as, the Smyiti literature, particularly th* law-books of
Manu and Yaj^aavalkya, the several dar^anas or systems of philosophy such as Nydya, Vai^eshika, Mimamsdi*
Vedanta, &c. Grammar, Bhetoric, Poetry in all its branches, Tantra and dramatic literature, Matheiiiatics;
Medicine, Astronomy, Music, and   such other tec^hnical or scientific bpetnches of learning.   It inserts   liX   *'
  Page [1]