In 7, དྲིན་, very kind, is as good as རིན་, very precious; in 17 དུས་ means practically the same as དུས་, ‘from this moment’, and ‘from this very day.’ In 19 གཞན་ ‘in another’ seems even a trifle better than གཞན་ ‘from another.’ གྱིས་ seems better in 32 than ཀྱང་ in B, ‘even, indeed!’ བྱེད་ ‘to perform,’ in l. 34, is as good as བསྒྲུབ་, also ‘to perform, accomplish,’ and the future form of the latter would be better if changed into a pf. form བསྒྲུབས་ or pr. སྒྲུབ་. In l. 40 གཏོང་, ‘the sending, throwing,’ seems as good as སྐྱེལ་, ‘(as silly) as the conveying.’ In 41 the article པ་ means the same as plural རྣམས་ B. In 44, བདག་, ‘egotism, selfishness,’ is substituted for ཉོན་, [[13]]‘sin’; similarly in 45 and 49 ཀུན་ ‘all,’ for རྣམས་ ‘many.’ Lastly, the difficult construction ལྷུང་, in 46, is replaced in B by the easier ལྷུང་, ‘not allowing (letting, making) it [the soul] (to) fall’ instead of ‘letting it remain fallen when once it has done so.’
All these examples seem to point out that one of the blockprints (probably the larger one) was derived from a version which was not actually copied from the original but rather written down from memory. The variants are no cutting or copying mistakes except ངེས་ and ངས་ l. 16, and དྲིན་ and རིན་ in l. 7.
In l. 26 we find an erroneous ཅིང་ for ཞིང་.
The two ༈ at the end of lines 16 and 48 in B (or rather at the beginning of the following lines, for that is where they must be put if the Tibetan text is printed line for line like English verse) do not agree with my conception of the structure of the poem as indicated by my typographical arrangement of it. I would not have expected a ༈ after line 16 but after lines 12, 24, 36 and 48. The occurrence of the sign after line 48 may, however, be taken to indicate that the next two verses have to be regarded as appendices to the body of the poem proper.
It must be mentioned that in the title, in both copies of A., the final word is བཞུགས་. In B., as the poem occurs in the body of the volume, there is no equivalent title. I have written བཞུགས་ without prejudice to the question whether the form བཞུགས་ is legitimate or not. My teachers say that before a ༎ the སོ་ is required.
The only reading taken from B is ངེས་ for the incomprehensible ངས་ of A 1 and 2, in line 16.
It may be, finally, remarked that the three copies from which this edition was prepared, show once more that textual [[14]]correctness and perfection of typographical execution are not necessarily related in Tibet. The two small prints which are, but for the single omission of a dengbu in line 16, quite correct, are small, badly printed on bad paper, and not carefully or neatly cut. The larger copy is neat, well printed on good paper, very legible, but not nearly so satisfactory as a text.
[a]Contents]]