Talk:Satkhandagama

Requested move 13 February 2016

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. Unopposed request. Number  5  7  21:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Satkhandagama → Shatkhandagama – h is there in correct spelling. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · [//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=Capankajsmilyo&project=en.wikipedia.org count])  03:21, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Missing: Discussion of the Dhavala tika
A significant part of the history is missing. The Dhavala commentary is much more than an explanation of the Shatkhandagama. There needs to be an account of the writing of the Dhavala, preservation of the manuscript and eventual publication of the single remaining manuscript. Malaiya (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Note that the Dhavala texts combines Sanskrit and Prakrit.Malaiya (talk) 03:10, 23 November 2022 (UTC)