Now the question is pointed. Whether the Monier William's explanation [5] कस्तूरीमृग / कस्तूरी--मृग m. the musk-deer Comm. on Kum. i , 55. [#48380] [Img:266,2]
based on the commentary on कस्तूरी-मृग -नाभिगन्धि - as मृगाणाम् = कस्तूरिका-कुरङ्गाणाम्, नाभिगन्धो विद्यते यत्र - by Vallabhadeva, Edn. M.S. Narayana Murti
Wiesbaden 1980 is wrong.
or both the deer mentioned in Kumarasambhava, 1.53 and the wild cat called civet, both produce the perfumery scent called कस्तूरी or both have different names? I remember, I had seen the civet cat, fed in cage, in our home, in childhood. It is called "puṇuṅgu" named in TN Burrow's dictionary :
4313 Ta. pur̤uku, puṉuku civet; civet cat. Ma. pur̤uku, pur̤u id. Ka. pur̤a, pur̤u, puṇugu, puṇagu, punagu, punugu, pula civet. Koḍ. pu·-bekkï civet cat. Tu. puṇuṅgu, puṇugu, punugu civet. Te. punūgu id. DED 3538.
Are puṇuṅgu and कस्तूरी used as Tilaka, ae one and the same or two? In the case of first, why Vallabhadeva commented it as Kuranga? which was taken up by MW for the interpretation of कस्तूरी-मृग and is it a confusion for Vallabhadeva? In the context, do Himalayan forests have musk-deer or wild cats called civets?
This seems to be the root cause of the question. And suggestion of कस्तूरी-मृग as the Sanskrit word, for civet, needs to be reconsidered if they are different. In the second case, it has taken to be granted, that musk-deers are found in Himalayan forests and in south, civet cats produce the perfumed scent.