Two Textual Studies Of Bhartrhari

Author(s): Ashok Aklujkar
Publisher: Ashok Aklujkar
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269280/1

Page #1

TWO TEXTUAL STUDIES OF BHARTRHARI*
ASHOK AKLUJKAR
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
The first half of the article discusses the range of reference and the significance of the title Vākyapadiya. It is argued that the title was originally given to the first two books only of Bhartṛhari's monumental work and that the word "Vakyapadiya" has been explained more precisely by ancient writers than is generally supposed. In the second half, the article points out how the published parts of Bhoja's Sṛngara-prakasa contain a number of borrowings from Bhartṛhari's partly vṛtti of the Vakya-kanda and how the discovery is significant for a textual study of both the works, the manuscript material for which is extremely insufficient.
1. THE TITLE VAKYAPADIYA
1.1. It is generally believed that the title Vakyapadiya refers to all the three kändas of Bhartṛhari's magnum opus.1 Even most of those scholars who have shown interest in the text of this work and hence have come to know some
references in literature that are contrary to the belief, have preferred to stick to it. They think
I thank Prof. Daniel H. H. Ingalls for suggesting stylistic improvements in the present article and Prof. V. Raghavan for drawing attention to the complete and revised edition of his Bhoja's Sṛngara-prakāśa.
1 There is only negligible evidence in support of the titles Hari-kärikä and Vakya-pradipa, recorded respectively by Oppert (1880: no. 4267) and Rajendralala Mitra (1877: 63, 64, 113). Hence those have not been taken up for consideration in the present article. See, however, footnote 26 for the latter. Belvalkar (1938: 252-254) notices a work called Vakyapadiya written by one Gangadāsa. He has probably mistaken Vakyapadi for Vakyapadiya. See Kielhorn (1880/1881: 71) and Rajen dralala Mitra (1886: 10).
Vancouver, B.C., Ca
published
that Vakyapadiya was a designation of all the three books in the older tradition and that it came to be restricted to the first two books only later. The purpose of the first part of the present article is to argue against this generally held view. It seeks to establish that the available evidence,
if carefully and collectively considered, leads us to no other conclusion than the following: Bhartrhari himself (the oldest tradition imaginable) had divided his monumental work in two ways. According to the first division, the work consisted of two parts-the Vakyapadiya (the first two books) and the Prakirnaka (the third book). The first part included the vrtti, the author's own explanatory and supplementary gloss. Divided into the Vakyapadiya and the Prakirṇaka, the entire work had no distinctive common name as
cept Charudeva Shastri's view. Yudhisthira Mimāmsaka (samvat 2019: 349) advocates the view that the term Vakyapadiya originally designated only the second kanda. As this view goes against all the evidence noted in this article and as it is based on a misunderstanding of the verse "trailokyagamini..." (footnote 29), I have refrained from giving it a prominent place in this article. It should also be noted that Mänavalli (1887: 1), Kunhan Raja (1936: 297-298) and Rama-govinda Sukla (1961: 6) express the view accepted by me. However, they expose only bits of the total evidence and do not point out the significance of the title.
Charudeva Shastri (1930, 1934) explicitly accepts the view that the title Vakyapadiya was given to all the three books in the older tradition. Sadhu Ram (1952: 136 fn. 5) accepts it in less clear terms, for he says that the tradition of referring to the first two books by the name Vakyapadiya had come into vogue by I-ching's time, and uses that name throughout in his 1956 article on the text of Bhartṛhari's work. It is difficult to ascertain the views of Sambasiva Sastri (1935), Ravi Varma (1942), Ruegg (1959), Rau (1962, 1964), Biardeau (1964), Subramania Iyer (1963, 1965, 1966) and AbhyankarLimaye (1965) with any exactitude; but from the fact that these scholars use the term Vakyapadiya for the third kanda, without saying that they use it just because they find it more convenient as a generally known term, one may infer that these scholars too are inclined to ac
547
3 According to Charudeva Shastri (1930: 636, 1934: 8), the cause of the restriction was the relative independence that the third kanda gained because of its importanee and voluminous commentary (see 3.2c and 3.3d below). Subramania Iyer (1963a: ga) thinks that the independent status given to the third kanda was a result of the fact that it had no auto-commentary.

Page #2

548
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
such. The second way of dividing the work was losophy, elucidated a number of grammatical relatively superficial, even mechanical. It had a views in the Mahābhāşya, and explained the imcolorless name Trikāndi for the whole and named portant vākya-nyāyas. Thus, there is a clear each kända after the most important word in difference of setting and point of view in the the first statement of that kanda.
composition of the first two kändas on the one 1.2. In the course of the discussion concerning hand and the third kända on the other. the conclusion given above about the exact range (c) Moreover, while the former are not divided of reference of the term Vākyapadiya, the present into samuddesas, the latter has no less than fourarticle clarifies also the meaning of the term. It teen samuddesas and there is reason to believe points out that an explanation of the formation that it once had at least sixteen (footnote 5). Vākyapadīya should not stop with "vākyam ca It shows a way of sectioning the discussion that padam ca; vakya-pade adhikrtya krtah granthah is absent from the first two books. Vākyapadīyam." Our sources are more specific (d) At the end of the commentary on the second on this point than scholars have heretofore kända. (BSS p. 291) we find the following verse: noticed.
"gurave Bhartrharaye sabda-brahma-vide namah / 2.1. There are a number of indications in sup- sarva-siddhanta-sandoha-sāråmsta-mayāya ca // port of the view that the division of the Trikāndi That the verse is meant to mark the conclusion into two parts-one consisting of the first two of a work or of a relatively independent part of a books and the other of the third book-was in work, is obvious. tended by the author.
(e) The third kāņda is referred to as Prakırnaka, (a) Verses 478-487 of the second kända are 'book or section devoted to miscellaneous matlike the concluding verses which one so often ters' or 'supplement', in some manuscripts concomes across at the end of Sanskrit compositions taining Bharthari's kārikās only, in all the known (Mānavalli, p. 1; Kunhan Raja, p. 291).
manuscripts of Helārāja's commentary on the (b) They are also meant to connect the third third kānda, and in the works of Vardhamāna kānda with the first two kandas. According to and I-ching (3.1 below). This points to the fact those verses, the first two kāndas contain a brief that the book was not considered to be a part of yet comprehensive statement of the views of the grammarians, while the third kända discusses
5"tatra dvadasa, saf (sad, dvadasa ?), caturvimšatir va these views in minute detail and also in the light
laksananiti Laksana-samuddege säpadesam savirodham
vistarena vyakhyāsyate."-ortti 2.77; "atra sad, dvadasa, of other systems of philosophy ("vyākarand
caturvimSatir vaitäni laksanāni tavad iha pradarsyante. gamah" and "ägamam" in 2.482-483 whereas etesam ca vitatya sopapattikam sanidarSanam sva-rupam "āgama-darsanaih" and "ägamaih" in 2.486- Pada-kande Laksana-samuddele vinirdistam iti grantha487). Thus, conciseness was the main principle followed in the composition of the first two; but
haka-pramadadinā vā Laksana-samuddesas ca Pada
kānda-madhye na prasiddhah."-ika 2.77, BSS p. 101 the latter was planned to be very extensive in (see footnote 6); "esă ca Țikākstā sva-vsttau sä сa tulyalength, in details, and in its scope; "saprapance balesvasambhavad ityadina bahu-prakara darsita. na svarūpatah” as the third introductory verse of ceyatta prakäränām asyäs tenápi tatra darfita. yasmad the Prakirnaka-prakasa says. It discussed the uktam seyam aparimāņa-vikalpā badha vist arena Badha
samuddebe samarthayişyata iti."-lika 2.77, BBS p. 106. philosophical problems from the point of view
Sadhu Ram's (1956: 71-79) contention that the Lakşaņaof the grammarian, studied the use of important
samuddeda and the Badha-samuddeda were not chapters philosophical terms in different schools of phi- of the Pada-kända but parts of Bharthari's commentary
on the Mimämsd-8 ltras, does not seem to rest on a sound
basis of evidence. Kunhan Raja's (p. 292 fn. 25) remark that the men- The second kända commentary printed in the tion of three kändas at the end of the second kanda is Benares Sanskrit Series is usually ascribed to Punyarāja. slightly puzzling, is proved to be incorrect by the signifi- In a forthcoming article, I wish to point out that a good cance of the concluding verses pointed out in these lines. case can be made for Helārāja's authorship of it.

Page #3

AKLUJKAR: Two T'extual Studies of Bhartrhari
549
the main body of the work and that it enjoyed 3.1. Considerations introduced in points (a) relative independence.
to (h) of the last section should be sufficient to (f) I-ching (p. 180) records a commentary by show that the division of Bhartphari's monuDharmapāla on the Prakirnaka? only, thus testi- mental work into two main parts dates from as fying that the Prakīrnaka was considered to be a far back as the author's time. What remains to relatively independent book in his time.
be proved is the thesis that the first part was (g) On the basis of the information given in called Vākyapadīya. Some facts which are in favor various catalogues of manuscripts, one can say of this view are noted below, followed by a disthat there are about 25 manuscripts (mostly cussion of possible objections. incomplete) of the Prakīrnaka-prakāśa, Helā- (a) A number of manuscripts of the Trikāndi rāja's commentary on the third kända, in exist- contain the words "samäpta Vakyapadiya-kārikā" ence. It is significant that a commentary on at the end of the second kända. either the first or the second kānda is not found (b) Helārāja refers to the first two books by in any of these manuscripts. They contain only the title Väkyapadiya not less than nine timeslo: the commentary on the third kändas although "vistarendgama-prāmānyam Vakyapadiye 'smāHelārāja states in no unclear terms at the very bhiḥ prathama-kände Sabda-prabhāyām nirnibeginning that he commented on the first two tam..."3.1.46, p. 54: Compare 1.27-43, pp. books as well. This independence unanimously 81-100. given to a commentary on the third book is "tasya cid-rūpasya cicchaktir apariņāminiti satisfactorily explained only if an old tradition vikārabhāvān nedam Sānkhya-nayavat pariņāmaof regarding that book as a composition mostly darśanam api tu vivarta-pakşah. viseşaś canayor complete in itself is presumed.
Vakyapadiye 'smābhir vyākyāta iti...” 3.2.15, (h) Introductory verses (including one bene- p. 119: Compare 1.1, pp. 8-9. dictory verse) which usually indicate the be- "śrotâpi ca tathaiva sva-vāsanā-vikāsânusārena ginning of a commentary either on an independent pratipădyate samāvista-sabda-bhāvanah, tena codwork or on a relatively independent book of a bodhita-sabda-bhavanah pravartata iti nirnitam voluminous work, are found at the beginning of Vākyapadiye." 3.3.32, p. 146: Compare 1.53, the Prakirnaka-prakäsa. They are not found at p. 113. the beginning of the commentary on the second "tantrena hi sakti-dvayam apy abhidadhāti kānda (see footnote 6).
pratyaya iti Vakyapadīye nirnītam." 3.7.84, p.
300: Compare 2.98-102, 455-477, BSS pp. 1247 So far I-ching's has been the only known reference to
126, 281-283. Most probably Helārāja has in Dharmapala's commentary on the Prakirnaka. Recently,
mind a portion of the vrtti that is missing in the I have come across one more reference to that work. only available manuscript (6.2 below). Durvekamiéra, in his Dharmottara-pradīpa, says: "tatha "ata eva svātantrya-saktih kala iti Vakyapadīye hi Prakirna-vrttikrd-Dharmapalenapi vidha-tabdah pra- siddhäntitam adhyāhita-kalām yasya kala-saktim käravaci pradarsitah. na punar asydyam abhiprāyaḥ vidha (dha)-tabdo jāti-vacitvat prakāra-väci na bhavatiti. upusry (1.000, p. 10) wy aura. 3.9.14, p. 04. anekarthatvat tasya prakāra-vācino 'pi prayogasya 'catastsu caivamvidhäsu tattvam parisamäpyate' (Nydya
same as manuscript à used by Abhyankar-Limaye (1965: bha., p. 2) ityadav anena prāygo dystatvat." Compare
II) which they describe as containing only the first Helārāja 3.1.1, p. 2.10-14.
and the second kanda with commentary. Raghavan Nambiar's catalogue of manuscripts in Mänavalli, p. 1.16-17; Charudeva Shastri 1930: 631, the library of the Oriental Institute at Baroda (1942: 1934:8: Sadhu Ram 1952: 136 fn. 5: Yudhisthira Mimām718-719) says that MS 319/1987 contains commentaries saka samvat 2019: 349; Abhyankar-Limaye 1965: 57 fn. 6; of the second and the third kāņdas; but this seems to be Rau 1962:378, 380, 382, 1964: 184, 189, 191. an error from the fact that the manuscript is described 10 One more occurrence of the word Vakyapadiya in As having only 66 leaves and an extent of only 4,800 Helārāja's commentary is taken up for consideration in granthas or Slokas. Moreover, it is, most probably, the 3.2d below.

Page #4

550
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
"svatantrasya cid-atmana eva jivâtma-gateyam saktiḥ kalákhya yukta, tatha hy uktam Vakyapadiye 'smabhiḥ." 3.9.62, p. 72: Compare 1.3, p. 18.
"... samvit... cakāstiti krta-nirnayam Vakyapadiye Sabda-prabhāyām asmabhis..." 3.9.62, pp. 72-73: Compare 1.134, pp. 213-221.
"sarva hi samvit... atanute. etac ca Vakyapadiye vistarenâsmabhir nirnītam." 3.9.70, p. 76: Compare 1.134, pp. 213-221.
"purusa-dharmeşu api hi sastram adhikrtam iti vicaritam Vakyapadiye." 3.9.105, p. 93: Compare 2.79c, BSS p. 109, 111.
Thus, Helārāja uses the term Vakyapadiya with reference to the first two kanḍas only."
(c) Vardhamana follows Heläraja. In the Gana-ratna-mahodadhi, he writes: "Bhartrharir Vakyapadiya-Prakirṇakayoḥ karta Mahabhaṣyatripádya vyakhyālā ca."
(d) If the work Peina mentioned by I-ching is identified with the Prakirnaka, the term Vakyapadiya has to be understood as the name of the first two kāṇḍas.13
No one has heretofore collected all the occurrences of the term Vakyapadiya in the Prakirnaka-prakasa. The peculiarity of Helārāja's use of the term, however, has often been remarked on. In 1883, Kielhorn (p. 227) drew
the attention of scholars to the fact that Helārāja uses
the term Prakirnaka for the third kända. He did not point out, however, that Heläraja reserves the term Vakyapadiya for the first two kändas, although he identified the Vakyapadika mentioned by I-ching with the first two kändas. In 1894, Pathak (p. 213 fn. 3) accepted Kielhorn's conclusion in this matter, as was done later by Kunhan Raja (pp. 291-293), Rangaswamy Iyengar (p. 147) and Sadhu Ram (1952: 136 fn. 5); but these scholars made no significant addition to the evidence. It was Charudeva Shastri, in 1930 (p. 631) and 1934 (p. 8), who first used the evidence from the Prakirnaka-prakasa in discussing the title Vakyapadiya. He referred to only two passages in the Prakirnaka-prakasa. In 1938, Hiriyanna (p. 263 fn. 9) referred to three more passages. Yudhisthira Mimamsaka (samvat 2019: 348-349) followed
Charudeva Shastri.
12 Charudeva Shastri 1930: 631, 1934: 8; Kunhan Raja, p. 291; Ravi Varma, p. 1; Sadhu Ram 1952: 136 fn. 5; Yudhisthira Mimämsaka samvat 2019: 349, samvat 2020: 353; Abhyankar-Limaye 1965: V fn. 2.
13 Kielhorn, p. 227; Pathak, p. 213 fn. 3; Charudeva Shastri 1930: 631, 1934: 8; Kunhan Raja, p. 291-293; Rangaswamy Iyengar, p. 147; Sadhu Ram 1952: 136 fn. 5.
3.2. In view of sections 2.1 and 3.1, the case that the title Vakyapadiya originally referred only to the first two kändas, is indeed very strong. Yet most of the scholars interested in Bhartṛhari's work have, with good reasons, been rather hesitant to accept it as an indisputable historical truth (footnote 2). The objections that have been voiced and that are likely to be raised are as follows:
(a) "All manuscripts of the text include the third kända in the Vakyapadiya." (Charudeva Shastri 1930: 636, 1934: 8).
(b) The word Vakyapathiya is unquestionably derived from vakya and pada (see the citations from Käsika, Śrngāra-prakāśa and Ṛju-vimalā pañcikä in 3.3b below). The names of the second and the third book are respectively Vakyakāṇḍa and Pada-kanṇḍa as far as our oldest sources inform us. Therefore, Vakyapadiya would not be a significant title if it did not cover the third kanda (Charudeva Shastri 1930: 636, 1934: 7-8; Kunhan Raja, p. 291).
(c) If it had been Helāraja's understanding that the Vakyapadiya does not include the Prakirṇaka, he would not have referred to the whole work as one consisting of three kändas in the fourth concluding verse of his commentary.14 The real implication of his references that apply the title Vakyapadiya to the first two books only, must, therefore, be that in his day the Prakirnaka was a well-known and important, voluminous work. His references are not meant to give the impression that Vakyapadiya was actually the title of only the first two books (Charudeva Shastri 1930: 636, 1934: 8).
(d) There remains one occurrence of the word Vakyapadiya in the Prakirnaka-prakāśa that was not included in the nine passages quoted in 3.1b above. In his introduction to verse 3.1.1 (p. 1), Helārāja says: "iha padârthâşṭaka-vicarapara-tväd Vakyapadiyasya,15..." Thus, according to him,
14 The lack of logical implication between the if-clause and the then-clause of this remark should be tolerated until 3.3d below.
15 "Vakyapadiyasya" cannot be construed with "prathamakandena..." which follows. If it were so construed, the ablative phrase "padarthāṣṭaka-vicara-paratvad" would remain dangling in the sentence.

Page #5

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bhartyhari
551
the Vakyapadīya consists of eight topics. This that line at that place in the manuscripts which view is supported by Vrsabha (p. 2.2-6, p. 64.19, they copied. 25) and by Bhartshari himself, who, after enu- (b) It would be difficult to advocate that the merating the eight topics in verses 1.24-26, says in title Vākyapadīya was coextensive with the title the vrtti: "rişu apy esu ślokeşu prastutasya pari- Trikāndi even if it were accepted that Bhartshari samāptih". Now, the first two kandas do not named his work after the second and the third seem to cover all those eight topics (see 3.3b, c kānda. One does not then get any satisfactory below for their names). In particular, they leave answer to the question, "Why did Bhartrhari out the apoddhāra-padartha which is covered by leave out the first kända when he named the the third kāņda. It may, therefore, be argued that work?” (Kunhan Raja, p. 292). The first kanda the latter must be part of the Vakyapadiya. is obviously as important as the other two kāndas.
(e) Verses from the third kānda are found If at all Bhartphari wished to name his magnum quoted as coming from the Vākyapadiya.
opus after the principal subject matter of each 3.3. I think that a satisfactory reply can be kānda, the omission from the title of a word that given to these five objections. I shall try to point would indicate the subject matter of the first out their weaknesses, though not necessarily in kanda—which contains a part of the statement of the order in which they have been given above. his unique philosophy-indeed seems to be very
(a) Two types of manuscripts exist, one de- strange. Charudeva Shastri's (1934: 8) explanaclaring the end of the Vākyapadiya at the close tion that the component vākya is indicative of of the second kānda and the other declaring the the subject matters of both the first and the secsame at the conclusion of the third kända. Which ond kända, for sphoța, the principal topic of the is more likely to point to historical truth? I first kānda, is identical with mahāvākya, the think that that colophon in whose case an origin principal topic of the second kānda, does not through confusion cannot be assumed, is more stand the test of facts. Neither are sphoța and likely to represent the genuine tradition. Now, mahāvākya the same entity, as is obvious from as the second and the third kändas are named the terms varna-sphoța etc., nor are they the respectively the Vakya-kānda and the Pada- principal topics respectively of the first kānda, kānda, as the title Vākyapadīya is formed by described as āgama-samuccaya, and the second adding the suffix īya to the dvandva compound kānda, called simply vākya-kānda (see the comväkya-pade, and as the third kända is thought mentator's introductions to 2.1-2. BSS p. 63 to be a supplement, a copyist could have been and 3.1.1, p. 1). Thus, it does not seem to be the easily led to suppose that the title Vākyapadīya case that Bhartphari named his work after the applied to all the three kandas;16 but what could main contents of its individual books. have led a copyist to suppose that it referred to Secondly, one fails to understand how the only the first two books? To maintain that he second and the third kāndas could be grouped was aware of all or some points discussed under together in a common title in view of the consections 2.1 and 3.1 would be to assume too much. cluding verses of the second kānda, the division The copyist class of India is not known to have of the third kānda alone into samuddeśas, its been so historically oriented as to justify such an Prakīrnaka character (2.1 above) and the availassumption. Copyists, therefore, must have ability of Bhartshari's own commentary on the written "samäptă Vakapadīya-kärika" at the first two kändas only.17 The second kända seems end of the second kända only because they found to have stronger connections with the first kända
than with the third kānda. 16 Kunhan Raja's (p. 293) explanation of the later extention of the title Vakyapadiya is different from the 17 In a future article, I shall discuss the extent of the one given here. As I do not hold that Bharthari and vitti. I shall point out that we have no evidence to supPunyarāja wrote commentaries on all the three kändas pose that Bharthari actually wrote a prose gloss on the (see footnotes 6 and 17), I cannot accept his explanation. Prakirnaka.

Page #6

552
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
It is highly unlikely that ancient writers like sutram-anvitarthabhidhāyini padani, na punar arthHeläräja and Vardhamāna could never think of dvaccheda-sūnyäni; padāny eva ca vakyam, na padaconnecting the title Vakyapadīya with the titles tirekiti, vākya-pade adhikrtya krtam vākyapadiyam. of the second and the third books. Yet this is siśukranda-yamasabha-dvandva iti chah." precisely what they have unanimously avoided. Srngära-prakāśa (p. 50) "karmanaḥ sambandhiIn the works of Jayaditya,is Sālikanātha and nā (yogo) yathā vākya-pade adhikrtya krto granBhoja, we read:
thaḥ, vākyapadīyaḥ."21 Kasikā on Pāṇini 4.3.88 "... siśukrandadibhyo It is worth noting that none of these works says dvitīyā-samarthebhyas chah pratyayo bhavaty adhi- that the title Vākyapadiya has been formed from krtya krte granthe. ano 'pavādah. sisunām kranda- the titles of the individual books of Bharthari's nam sibukrandah, tam adhikrtya krto granthaḥ, composition. All that they say is that the word sisukrandiyah. Yamasya sabha Yamasabham, yama- Vakyapadiya is a name of a grantha (see footnote sabhīyaḥ. dvandvät-agnikasyapīyaḥ. syenakapo- 20) and as such it is to be derived from the comtīyah. Sabdarthasambandhiyam prakaranami' Vāk- pound vākya-pade. yapadīyam...."
One may now ask: If Bhartrhari did not name Brhatt (part I. p. 389) "ta ete 'nvitah padâr- his work either after the titles of the second and thāḥ. eşām abhidhānāni padāni. tad idam vāk- the third kända or after the principal subject yapadiyam.20 Salikanātha's Rju-vimala pañcikā matter of each kända and if the name Vakyapa(pp. 389-390) comments "... vaiyakarana-matam dīya was originally given only to the first two niräkurvann aha ta ete 'nvitäh padarthāh, eşām books, what is the significance of that term? abhidhānäni padāni, tad idam vākyapadiyam. It seems to me that the title Väkyapadiya has.
been coined or chosen by taking into consideration 18 The first five adhyayas of the Katika seem to have the principal concern of the first two books as a been written by JayAditya. See Yudhisthira Mimämsaka whole. As will be shown below, these two books (samvat 2020: 424-425, 428-429).
are mainly devoted to eight topics. Hence the 1. Abhyankar-Limaye (1965: VIII fn. 5, 409) under
statements of Vrsabha and Helārāja to the effect stand "&abdarthasambandhīyam prakaranam" as a separate sentence containing one more illustration of the
that the Väkyapadiya is padarthastaka-vicāraformations covered by Panini 4.3.88. According to them, para. The topics can further be grouped under it is a reference to the first udrttika in the Mahabhäsya, three heads: "siddhe sabdartha-sambandhe". I do not know if any later
sabda-anvākhyeya and pratipadaka, grammarian has used the term sabdarthasambandhīya prakarana to refer to the discussion under this värttika.
artha-apoddhāra-padartha and sthita-laksana, I think that the word prakarana would be redundant in sambandha-kārya-karana-bhäva, yogya-bhāva, such an expression as the suffix Tya signifies 'adhikstya pratyayanga and pratyaya-dharmånga. kyte granthe' according to the explanation and the illus
From this follows the Kāśikā description "sabtrations given by the Katika. Moreover, it is not customary to refer to the Mahabhasya discussions as dartha-sambandhīyam prakaranam Vakyapadiprakaranas. Such use of that term goes against the yam.” Now, it is possible to refer to the three following definition:"bästraika-defa-sambaddham sastra
heads by using words denotative of the categories käryantare sthitam / ahuḥ prakaranam näma grantha
of meaningful linguistic units, namely vākya and bhedam vipascitaḥ //." On the other hand, the definition perfectly suits the Väkyapadiya which is unambiguously pada, for any such category is bound to be a class described as prakarana by Vrsabha (pp. 1, 2, 51). Kunhan Raja (p. 293 fn. 28) seems to understand "Sabdartha
11 Kunhan Raja (p. 292 fn. 24) noticed the occurrence sambandhīyam prakaranam Vakyapadiyam" as I do-as
of the word väkyapadiya in the Brhati and the Rju-vimala one sentence.
10 It should be noted that Prabhakara does not use the paficika; but he did not explain its significance. The word vikunnad ng is title of particular work and that Kasika reference and explanation have been known for the alert commentator Salikanátha refrains from using years; Mänavalli (p. 1), the first editor of the Vakyapadany such expression as "prakaranam" or "granthaḥ in Tya, refers to it. The Songdra-prakada passage is noticed his explanation of the word.
in this article for the first time.

Page #7

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bharthari
553
of linguistic units (sabda)22 related to (sambandha) vākyapadīya; he is only exploiting its general meaning (artha). This paves the way for the com- meaning. mon content of the explanations of the term (e) One may ask if the first two kāņdas cover Vākyapadīya given by Jayaditya, Sālikanātha all the eight topics briefly indicated in 3.3b above. and Bhoja: "vākya-pade adhikrtya ...."
In my opinion, they deal with these topics in a I may put the point in reverse order as well. nut-shell and leave it to the third kända to return In most general terms, the first two books of to these topics whenever necessary. I notice the Bhartphari's work principally deal with the sen- following scheme of discussion in the Brahmatence and its meaningful constituents. As any kānda and the Vākya-kānda: such discussion is impossible without the con- apoddhāra-pddartha-vrtti 1.23 p. 58; vrtti 1.24sideration (i) of the nature of these entities 26 pp. 65-67, 72-76; 2.12-18, 34-37, 41-56, 60-63, (especially with respect to each other), (ü) of 119–142, 153–169, 187–197, 199-201, 204-231, what they possess and (iii) how they possess 235-319, 325, 411, 417-442, 450-454, 459 460. what they possess, the books are about (meaning- sthita-laksana artha-vrtti 1.24-26 pp. 67-68, ful) linguistic units, meaning and the mutual rela- 77; 2.7, 13-18, 31, 34, 40-48, 55, 60-61, 64-118. tion of the two as well. In particular, Bhartshari 143-152, 216–217, 239-249, 319, 324-325, 328– had two types of linguistic units and meanings, 352, 410-429, 437-442, 449. and four types of their relations in mind. So the anvākheya sabda-vrtti 1.23 pp. 52-58; vrtti books specifically discuss eight topics.
1.24-26 pp. 68-71, 78; 1.44-51, 55, 70-122, 134; Does Prabhākara's usage in the Brhati go 2.1-6, 19-33, 50, 52, 57-59, 341-345. against the interpretation of the title Vākya- pratipädaka sabda-vrtti 1.24-26 p. 71, 78: padīya given above? I do not think so. The 2.10-12, 164-182, 229-234. purport of his remark, judged in the light of karya-karana-bhäva sabdartha-sambandha-vrtti Sālikanātha's commentary, seems to be this: 1.12 p. 42; vrtti 1.23 pp. 60-61; vrtti 1.24-26 p. 'The real vākyapadiya (see footnote 20) is that 71, 78-79; 1.44-47, 51-57. which declares the padas to be the signifiers of the yogya-bhāva sabdartha-sambandha-vrtti 1.23 p. connected (sentential) meaning and which, by 60; vrtti 1.24-26 p. 71, 79-81; vrtti 2.16"... Sabdo accepting this thesis, does not admit a sentence 'py aparena yogyatákhyena sambandha-kalpenomeaning over and above the meaning of the con- pagrhītårtha-rūpo...". stituents, and hence advocates the view that the pratyayanga sabdârtha-sambandha-vrtti 1.24-26 sentence is nothing but the padas. On the other p. 72.24 hand, the grammarians have accepted a vākyapadiya which declares that the sentence and the (a) Actually, as he states in 1.26 cd, Bharthari sentence meaning alone are real, and that the does not promise us a discussion of each topic. (b) As padas and the padarthas have a place only in
the topics are interconnected, some overlapping in the
listing given, is inevitable. Even Bhartshari experiences grammatical analysis.' In other words, Prabha
some difficulty in arranging the discussions. This is kara suggests that vākyapadīya-a study of vākya indicated by the gaps that are noticed in the above listand pada-should logically conclude "padany eva ing of each individual topic. (c) I give the numbers väkyam" instead of "vākyam eva, na padāni.” He roughly in two senses: I mention even those verses which is not trying to give a new meaning to the word
only indirectly deal with the indicated topic; I do not exclude the statements of those views which Bhartshari
does not accept. (d) The kārika number includes the 12 In the Trikändi, sabda does not mean only 'word'. vrtti wherever it is available. (e) For padartha as sthitaIt has a variety of meanings each of which is to be deter- laksana artha, see those verses in the apoddhära-padartha mined by a careful study of the context. Unfortunately listing which point out the unitary character of padartha. this point has been lost sight of in the available transla- () For a discussion of pada as anvakhyeya sabda, from the tions. In the present context, tabda denotes any lin- point of view of primary and secondary usage, see guistic unit with which meaning is associated either in 2.250-297. ordinary life or in grammatical analysis.
* That there is cognition of meaning because sabda

Page #8

554
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
pratyaya-dharmånga sabdartha-sambandha-vrtti kanda with the remark that they belong to the 1.12 pp. 42-43; vrtti 1.13 p. 47; vrtti 1.24-26 p. Vakyapadiya (Abhyankar-Limaye 1965: 259, 269, 72: 1.27-43, 123-147; 2.108-110, 361-363; vrtti 332, 340, 344).25 Only Parvatiya Visvešvara-sūri 2.59 "loke 'py arthena prayuktesu sabdesu śāstrena (pp. 36, 648, 660, 661, 727, 741, 750, 808, 810-811, dharma-niyama-mātram eva kriyate."
829, 830, 848-849, 905, 908, 985, 1041, 1044, 1045, (d) The attempt in 3.2c above to explain away 1228, 1284, 1285, 1503) who is definitely later the evidence that is available in the Prakīrnaka- than Bhattoji Dikşita, constantly cites the verses prakāśa is fallacious. In the first place, there is no from the Pada-kānda as coming from the Vākyacontradiction in maintaining that Bharthari's padiya and seems to be unaware of the Vakyawork is divided in two ways—that there is one padīya-Trikāndī distinction. arrangement by kändas forming the Trikāndi, Such scanty evidence is hardly capable of disand one arrangement by the significant titles lodging a view that is based on the consideration Vakyapadīya-Prakīrnaka. Secondly, the interpre- of many pieces of evidence. It is conceivable that tation given of Helārāja's references is baseless. Medhâtithi and others are quoting from memory There is no reason to suspect that he meant any- and hence making a mistake (with the exception thing other than what his sentences literally con- of Parvatiya Visvesvara-süri), or that they, vey. Not even once does he use the term Vākya- thinking of the Prakīrņaka status of the third padīya to refer to the three kõndas. Thirdly, the kānda, are extending the term Vākyapadīya to imposed interpretation implicitly assumes that include that kända, too. Vākyapadīya was the title of all the three books 4 .1. Having thus proved that the title Vākyabefore Helārāja---a thesis that is meant to be padīya was originally given to the first two books proved. Finally, it is unclear why the importance only, let me add that I consider the vrtti on these and fame of the Pada-kända should restrict the books to be by Bharthari and to be an integral reference of the term Vākyapadīya.
part of the Vakyapadīya. I am aware that my (e) Abhyankar and Limaye (1965:197-357, view differs from that of Dr. Biardeau (pp. 2-21) 409 422) have given us the largest collection of who thinks that Hari-vşşabha, a person other than Trikāndi verses that are quoted in the works of BhartȚhari, wrote the Vākyapadīya vrtti. I must, later writers. I have been able to add some more however, leave a demonstration of my view to to this collection. After a study of these quotations some later occasion as it would lead me too far I find that most of them are given either without afield. At present, I prefer merely to draw attenspecifying the source or with some such indication tion to the fact that Prof. Subramania Iyer of the source as "tad uktam Harinā," "yad āha (1965: xviii-xxxvii) has already refuted some of tatrabhavān" and "tathā ca Harih." Among those Dr. Biardeau's arguments. quotations which have been mentioned in early 5.1. The fact that the Vakyapadiya and the works as coming from the Vākyapadīya, I have Prakirnaka are two relatively independent parts, but found a single verse from the third kāņda; should not lead one to suppose that Bhartphari's Medhâtithi whose date Abhyankar and Limaye magnum opus was not conceived to be one unified (1965: 245) give as 825-900 A.D., cites 3.2.12 as work. Such a supposition would go against the coming from the Vakyapadiya in his bhāşya on facts noted in 2.1b, e, 3.2a and 3.3c, e above, the Manusmrti 12.118. Among later writers, Gokula- references in the vrtti (see footnote 5 and vrtti 1.3 nāthamiśra, Kaunda-bhatta and Hari Bhāskara p. 20, vrtti 2.71), Vrşabha's tīkā (p. 4, 196) and have together quoted five verses from the third
25 Kaunda-bhatta (Abhyankar - Limaye 1965:359) and artha are related, is such a basic, common sense fact quotes one more verse with the remark "uktam ca Vakya(Vrsabha, p. 81.18-19) that Bhartshari has not been padīye." To judge from its context, it should belong to forced to devote much space to discuss it. Also, the dis- the third kanda; but it is not found in that kanda. Verses cussions of the three remaining relations are indirectly quoted by Parvatiya Visvesvara-sūri on pp. 68 and 1273 s discussion of the pratyayanga relation.
of his work are also missing from the extant Vakyapadīya.

Page #9

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bhartyhari
555
tīkā on the second kända (p. 98, 140, 145, 146, BHOJA'S SRNGĀRA-PRAKSA AND THE 162, 163, 164, 167, 176, 208, 213, 240) to the
VĀKYA-KAN DA-VRTTI discussions in the third kānda, and the references
6.1. Bhartshari's vrtti of the Brahma-kānda and in the Prakirnaka-prakāśa (e.g., those which are the Vakuakända (4.1 above) is still to be satiscollected in 3.1b above) to the discussions in the
factorily edited. In the case of the latter it is earlier kandas.26
not even printed in its entirety. Sometime about Thought of as one composition consisting of
1941, the first ninety-six pages of Charudeva three books, the work was called Trikāndi, a
Shastri's planned critical edition of the kärikäs, name going well with the names of other works of the
the vrtti and the tikā of the second kända (footnote Bhartphari-Tripādī, the commentary on the
6) were made available to the book-sellers. Those Mahābhāsya, 27 and possibly Subhāşita-trisati or
included the vrtti, wherever it was extant, only šataka-traya, the famous collection of three centu
up to the verse "kāryāņām antarangatvam ....)33 ries of poems.28 Thus we read at the end of the
In 1965, Abhyankar and Limaye presented it in Prakīrņaka-prakāśa:
excerpts as a part of the seventh appendix of their trailokyagāmini yena Trikāndi Tripadī-kstā /
edition of the kārikā text. Thus, an important tasmai samasta-vidyā-sri-kantāya
work in the grammatical tradition of India has Haraye namaḥ //29
not even been entirely printed and published, not Under the Trikāndi arrangement, each kända to mention a critical edition complete with studywas named after the most important word in the aids 34 first statement of that kānda.30
6.2. So far only one manuscript of the Vakya26 Most probably, Helārāja named his commentaries
kānda-vrtti has furnished transcripts to the editors by kända as Sabda-prabha, Vakya-pradīpa (Ramakrishna of the Trikāndi. This incomplete and often corrupt Kavi, p. 236) and Prakirnaka-prakasa. If this guess is manuscript in Malayalam characters once becorrect, one more indication of the unity of the Trikandi longed to Bhavadāsa Nambudiri of Mundanathu is furnished.
Mana, Ottappalam, Malabar, Kerala (Subra17 Modern scholars generally give the name of this commentary 48 Mahâbhâsya-dīpika. See Yudhisthira Mimāmsaka (samvat 2020: 344-363) and the three incom
11 The vrtti of the Brahma-kända has been printed five plete editions by Brahmadatta Jijñāsu (Yudhisthira
times and translated twice. Yet it is replete with wrong Mimāmsaka samvat 2020: 356), Swaminathan (1965) and
and problematic readings. A number of alternative Abhyankar-Limaye (1967). In & forthcoming article, I
readings have not even been recorded. I shall set forth wish to argue that the evidence for this name is very
these facts in a textual study which is, at present, under scanty and that the commentary should be referred to by the name Tripadi.
12 Yudhisthira Mimāmsaka samvat 2019: 352. In his 28 The possibility that Bhartshari, the grammarian, letter of July 11, 1968, Charudeva Shastri informs me: and Bharthari, the poet, could be the same person is not
"A fragment of the vrtti edited by me was issued for so slight as is generally assumed. I must, however,
circulation without my knowledge, sometime before or reserve a detailed consideration of this problem for some
after the Partition. It carried no Introduction, not even future occasion.
a Prefatory Note. I saw this fragment in the Bookstall 2. The verse has been misunderstood by Yudhisthira
of the Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, Banaras." Mimämsaka (samvat 2019: 349-350; 2020: 353). Through
* No. 184 (p. 154) of Manavalli's and Charudeva three double-meaning expressions and two metaphors, it
Shastri's editions; no. 182 of the Abhyankar-Limaye suggests the similarity of Bhartshari with Vişņu. It is to
edition. be construed thus: "yena Tripadī-krta trailokyagamini Trikāndt-tripadī kstā ...." It means: 'I pay my rever
** It is expected that the Deccan College Monograph ence to Hari, the author of the Tripādi, who took three
Series, Poona, will publish a critically edited text of the steps in the form of the Trikāndi that covered the three
Vakya-kända (karika + vrtti) with the commentary that worlds, and who is the lord of Sri in the form of all lores.'
is usually ascribed to Punyarāja (footnote 6). Prof. The experessions Tripadī-kyta, Sri-kanta and Hari are Subramania Iyer is at present working on it. Another paranomastic, while Trikāndi-tripadi and vidya-eri are critical edition, most probably only of the kārikās, is metaphors.
expected from Prof. Wilhelm Rau, Marburg, Federal 10 Point suggested by Abhyankar-Limaye (1965: VII). Republic of Germany.

Page #10

556
mania Iyer 1966: viii). Its present location has not been explicitly stated. One of its transcripts is preserved in the Government Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras (No. 5543); the other (possibly made from the Madras transcript) is in the Adyar Library, Madras (No. 547 or 38.1.3 or TR 430). Charudeva Shastri and AbhyankarLimaye used copies (most probably, hand-written) of the Madras transcript for their editions. Scholars at present working on the text of the Trikandi (footnote 34), are using copies (most probably, photo-copies) of the same.
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
6.3. As a part of my study of Bhartṛhari's thought, I am preparing a text of the Vakyakāṇḍa-vrtti that will be more intelligible than the one found in the transcripts. In this activity, I am utilising not only the editions mentioned above but also the commentaries on the Trikandi, the literature that has derived its inspiration, in part or in full, from the Trikandi, and Bhartṛhari's commentary on the Mahabhaṣya. By comparing the discussions of the common points and by studying the style of the sytti and the Tripadi (footnote 27), I am trying my best to make up for the corruption of the only available manuscript.
6.4. Recently unexpected help came from the published parts of Bhoja's Srigara-prakasa (SP). It has been known to scholars for years that the ŚP quotes a number of verses from the Trikandi. Editors of the published incomplete editions, P. P. Subrahmanya Sastri and Yadugiri Svami, have occasionally (e.g., p. 19 of the former and Vol. I, p. 17 of the latter) pointed this out. Raghavan who has studied the entire SP critically, has drawn attention to this fact (1940: 17, 21, 22, 23; 1963: 724-728, 731-734, 738, 747, 752). Quite recently Abhyankar and Limaye (1965: 319-351) have listed the verses that Bhoja quotes from the Trikandi; but the fact that Bhoja borrows a number of passages literally from the Vakya-kanḍa-vrtti has not been pointed out. The
35 Kunhan Raja (1936: 287) spells the name and the address of the owner as Bhavadasan Namboodirippad of Mundanat Mana, Ottapalam, S. Malabar. According to his statement, the manuscript was returned to the owner. Whether it is still with the same man or family is not known.
following part of the present article proposes to do so.
7.1. The discovery is significant in more than one way. Not only does it help in reconstructing some portions of the Vakya-kanda-vrtti, but it also offers additional material for a critical study of the text of the SP, the manuscripts of which are very few (Raghavan 1940: 1; Subrahmanya Sastri, p. 1; Josyer, p. 2). An indication of the principles followed in composing (writing and compiling) the SP is also given. It becomes evident that the author planned to exploit the works available in his time as literally as he could and to weld them together as far as the theme of his work, or better, the themes of the chapters of his work, permitted. Even in a cursory reading one notices that Bhoja borrows verbatim quite a few passages from such works as the Mahabhāṣya (e.g., Vol. I, pp. 123-124 of Yadugiri Svāmi's edition). Raghavan (1940: 17; 1963: 724-725, 728, 733, 756, 901) points out that the discussions such as that of the padârtha are mostly reproduced from the Nydya-mañjart of Jayanta-bhatta. As will be seen below, the case of Bhoja's borrowings from the vrtti is the same; in most of the instances, he borrows word for word. Thus, the SP is not only intended to be an encyclopaedic work but follows the principle of making select passages from standard works carry the burden of discussion as far as they can.36 One more important fact emerges out of this point and the borrowings noticed below. In all probability, the author of the SP regarded the vrtti as an integral part of the Vakyapadiya. His testimony, therefore, seems to be against those who dispute Bhartṛhari's authorship of the vrtti (see 4.1 above).
8.1. The following procedure has been adopted in giving the texts of the common passages: (a) The vrtti passages are cited in their critically edited form, that is, as they are, at present, written
36 Bhoja borrows a few passages from the Brahmakända vrtti too; but as the text of that part of the vṛiti is in a better shape (see, however, footnote 31), I have not pointed out the parallels there. Moreover, to judge from style and content, there is the important possibility that Bhoja quotes from the Tripadi (footnote 27) as well.

Page #11

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bharthari
557
in my more intelligible version of the vrtti trans- yam."7 na hi tathanyatha sarvatha ceti" samanyam avasthita cript (see 6.3 above). Variant readings are noted
rupam" kifcid asti.sarva ete vibesd eva. tasyam tu sdmanydin the footnotes. These are the readings that ap
vasthayam bhedasya kasyacid anirüpanad atyägāca ca ya
sarva-bhedopagraha-yogyataya pariplavamändrtha-kalpear in Charudeva Shastri's edition of the Vākya
pana täm" sambandho vişayantarad avacchidya vitiste kända (Charu.), the Adyar Library transcript visaye niyamayati. (AT) and a typescript of the Madras transcript (MTT). As stated in 6.2 above, all this 'critical
ŚP Vol. I, p. 294; AL pp. 320-321. apparatus' is based on one Malayalam manuscript.
yady api catra kriya-karaka-matrånvayabhidhane Hence, the variant readings are useful only as a kriya-karaka-matra-sambandhitvam kriya-kāraka-sämäncheck on my emendations. It will be seen that the yabhiprayam. tathahi; svartha-matropadāyinaḥ sarvaSP is as important for establishing the text of the
bhedän prati yogyatā; tad evanugunya-matram sämänyam, Vākyapadiya as a fragmentary vrtti manuscript of
na hi tathanyatha sarvatha veti sämänyam avasthita-rupam
kiñcid asti, sarva eva te visesa eva, tasyās tu sämänyavasindependent origin would have been. (b) Numbers thayam bhedasya kasyacid anirupanad atyagac ca ya of the kārikās of the Vakya-kānda do not always sarva-bhedopagraha-yogyataya pariplavamānartha-kalagree in the editions of Mānavalli, Charudeva pana lam sambandho vişayantarad avacchidya viliste Shastri and Abhyankar-Limaye. I have adopted
visaye niyamayati. tad uktam-sarva-bhedanugunyam tu
sämänyam apare viduh / tad arthântara-samsargad the numbering of the last-named edition although, bhajate bheda-rupatām // bhedän ākānkşatas tasya si in my opinion, it makes a mistake in accepting pariplavamănata / avacchinatti sambandham tām some quotations in the vrtti as kärikäs of the vibeye nivesayan // Vākya-kānda. (c) I have cited the kārikās in their
vrtticritically edited form when they precede the
sāmarthya-prāpitam yac ca vyaktyvrtti; but I have not recorded the variant readings
artham anuşajyate / of the kārikās as this article concentrates only on
Srutir evânuşange să bädhikā lingathe vrtti. (d) The SP passages from Vol. I are
vākyayoḥ //73// given exactly as they appear in Yadugiri Svāmi's
aprăpto yas tu sukladiḥ samnidhānena edition published by Josyer. Passages marked as
gamyate / coming from Vol. II are reproduced from the
sa yatna-prāpito vākye bruti-dharmasupplement to appendix III (pp. 297–351) of the
vilakṣaṇaḥ //74// Abhyankar-Limaye edition (AL). The editors do not give any particulars about this edition of the
itas cavibhaga-pakso na yuktah. Sruti-väkya-samaväye
brutitvaviteşena pāradaurbalydsambhavät. iha brutir SP. Consequently, I have no access to it and am
nāmaika-sabda-vişayaika-pada-nibandhandrtha." forced to borrow citations from AbhyankarLimaye.
*7 Charu., AT, MTT sämängdhikaranyamätram. 8.2. The common passages:
18 AT, MTT cet. The phrase tathanyatha sarvatha ca vrtti
is found in 3.3.22, 3.14.501. sarva-bhedanugunyam tu sāmānyam
39 Charu., AT, MTT sämänyavastharūpam. apare viduh /
40 Charu. dnugunyac; AT anyagrdc; MTT anyayac. tad arthântara-samsargād
The reading accepted here is also not very satisfactory. bhajate
41 Charu., -yogyatäpariplavamanakalpanarthasya tam; bheda-rūpatām //44//
the reading of AT and MTT is the same except for bhedānākānkşatas tasya yā pari- tāsām in the place of tām. In the reading accepted here, I plavamănată /
am not sure whether pariplavamana is an adjective of avacchinatti sambandhas tām
artha or of artha-kalpanā. visese
6 Charu. has one more sentence in the vrtti of verses niveśayan //45//
44-45. In my opinion, that sentence is a part of the intro
duction to verse 46. apare tu manyante--sudrtha-matropadayinah sarva- " The urtti on verses 73-74 does not come to an end bhedan prati ya yogyatá tad evanugunya-matram sdman with this sentence; it is much more extensive; but I have

Page #12

558
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
SP Vol. II, p. 330; AL p. 321.
śrutir hi nămâneka-pada-nibandhana eva sabdavisayaḥ vidhyadir arthaḥ...." tad uktam sämarthyaprăpitam yac ca vakyârtham anuṣajyate / śrutir evânusange să badhika linga-vākyayoḥ //
vrtti
yatha sinadimän pindo go-fabdenâbhidhiyate/
tatha sa eva go-sabdo vahîke 'pi vyavasthitab //252//
sarva-saktes tu tasyaiva sabdasyânekadharmaṇaḥ /
prasiddhi-bhedad gaunatvam mukhyatvam copavarnyste //253//
eka evayam go-sabdo vakyes kvacij jati-visesabhidhāyi. tad yatha gaur anubandhya iti. kvacij jätyupasarjane dravyamatre vartate. tad yatha gaur ānīyatām, gaur duhyatäm iti. kecid atra jäti-matrabhidhayitvam manyante." kvacid go-sabdaḥ paricchinna eva dravya-viseşe vartate. tad yatha asty atra kañcid gam pasyasiti mahati gomandala asinam yada go-palakam prcchati.47 kvacit tu radha-sambandheşu kriya-gunesu go-sabdaḥ prayujyamano drsyate. tad yathä jädyad aucchistyat sarvasahatvän mahasanatvad va gaur vähika iti. tasya sarva-sakter go-sabdasya nimittântaräd avacchidyamana-samarthyasya prasiddhyaprasiddhibhyam mukhyatvam gaunatvam caso vijñayate. yatrarthe śruti-mätrendvarudhyate sabdaḥ, na cârthântaram abhyantarikaroti sabdantarabhidheyatvena prasiddham, tatra mukhya-vyapadesam labhate. yatra tu sabdântarâdibhir upaniyate, prasiddham ca sabdantarabhidheyam arthântaram avalambate tatra gaunasi iti vyapadiéyate.
not reproduced it here in its entirety, for it does not offer any parallel to the SP passage and hence is irrelevant in the present context.
"Here I have dropped one sentence that summarises the vṛtti explaining verse 73.
45 AT, MTT väcye.
The word manyante is followed by tad yatha in AT and by tad yatha... (indicating a gap in the manuscript) in MTT.
47 AT tada gopalakam prcchasiti; MTT reads the same, with yada in the place of tada.
48 AT, MTT rudhisambandheşu.
49 AT jätyäkhyadaucchauşnyam sarvamahatvan; MTT jätyäkhyadauchusnyam sarvasahatvän.
50 AT and MTT omit the words mukhyatvam and ca which I have supplied on the strength of the context.
51 AT avalambamäno loke 'rthagrahana; MTT avalambamano loke 'rtha loke 'rthagrahanam.
SP Vol. II, pp. 358-359; AL pp. 323-324.
evayam go-sabdo vakye na kvacit jati-visesabhidhayi gaur nanu ca gauna-mukhyayor viveko yujyate. tathahi eka anubandhya iti kvacit jätyupasarjana-dravya-mätra-vāci gaur aniyatam iti kvacit paricchinna eva dravya-viseşe vartate anyatra kañcit gam pasyasiti, kvacit tu rudhasambandheşu kriya-guneşu go-sabdaḥ prayujyamāno dréyate yatha jadyat aucchistyät sarvasahatvät maha sanatvät vä gaur vähika iti. evam sarva-sakter go-sabdasya arthaprakaranádibhir avacchidyamana-samarthyasya pṛthivyadav iva vähike 'pi vartamanasya gaunatvam upapadyate. tad aha-sarva-saktes tu tasyaiva sabdasyânekakarmaṇaḥ vṛttyabhävän na gaunatvam mukhyatvam vä prakalpyate // tatha hi-yathā sasnâdiman pindo gosabdenâbhidhiyate / tatha jāḍyādi-gunavan vähiko 'py abhidhiyate //
vrtti
anekârthatvam ekasya yaiḥ sabdasyȧnugamyate/
siddhyasiddhi-kṛtā tesãm gauna-mukhya-prakalpana //263//
iha keşäñcid anekårthatvam yaugapadyena vyavasthitam nimittântarad avacchedends vatisthate. keṣāñcit paryāyeṇaiva samarthyad ekas yapi nitya-pravibhaktam eva nänarthatvam. tatra yaugapadye's yada prasiddhenårthenavacchidyate sabdas tada mukhya-vyapadeśam labhate. aprasiddhena tv arthena praptâvacchedasya gauna-vyapadeso bhavati. tatha paryayeņa yasmin vakye prasiddharthaḥ sabdas tatra mukhyaḥ, anyatra tu gaunaḥ.
SP Vol. II, p. 361; AL p. 324.
tasmat eka eva sabdo 'nekam artham yaugapadyena paryayena vabhidhatte na tu svartham utsṛjyârthântare pravartate. prasiddheya-prasiddhibhyam ca tasya mukhyagauna-vyapadeso jayate. tatra yaugapadye 'pi yada prasiddhenârthenavacchidyate sabdas tada mukhya-vyapadesam labhate. aprasiddhena tv arthena praptavacchedasya gauna-vyapadeśo bhavati. paryayenapi yasmin vakye prasiddharthaḥ sabdas tatra mukhyo 'nyatra tu gaunaḥ.50
52 AT, MTT vyavasthita-.
53 AT, MTT apyavacchedenā.
54 AT, MTT evam.
55 AT, MTT yaugapadyena.
56 MTT vacchidyante.
57 AT sabdam tu na; MTT sabdantu na.
58 AT, MTT präptâvacchedasyä.
59 After this passage, strangely enough, Bhoja quotes verse 274 instead of verse 263.

Page #13

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bharthari
559
vrttigo-yuşman-mahatām cvyarthe svår
thäd arthântare sthitau / arthântarasya tad-bhāvas tatra mukh
yo 'pi drśyate //279// mahattvam sukla-bhāvam ca prakstiḥ
pratipadyate / bhedenâpekṣitā să tu gaunatvasya pra
yojikā //280//
vrttiatyanta-viparito 'pi yatha yo 'rtho va
dhāryate / tathā-sampratyayaḥ sabdas tatra mukh
yah prayujyate //285// iha kecid dcarya buddhi-pratyavabhasa-matrena sarvatra tulya hi sabda-pravsttir iti pratyavalisthante.70 jala-nirbhäsäyäy hi megatronikäyam buddhav utpannayam mukhya eva jala-sabdah prayoktavya iti tulyam hi pravrttinimittam sarvatra sabdasya prayojakam bhavitum arhati.
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 326.
ihasrita-rupasyarthavato nipätasya pragshya-saħjña vidhiyate. caurädikantadi parala-mukhya-vsttayas san- tiva. prasiddharthal-tirobhāvenarthantare vartamāna gauna-vyapadesa-yuktaḥ. tatra mukhyarthanam grahanam vijayate. agaur gaur abhavat, go 'bhavad iti pragrhya- saññia na bhavati. atvam tvam sampadyate, tvadbhavatiti madhyamo na bhavati. amahan mahan sampanno, mahad bhutas candrama ity atvam na bhavati. atra tu kācid upacarita-vikara-rūpå praktih. yatha indra-sthuna upendro grāvā iti. 6 käcit parināmini. yatha dugdham dadhibhavati, hema kundalibhavatiti.63 tatra parinäminişu praktisu sukla-mahattvadibhir mukhyair api yoge sati, pürvasya avasthāyah" pracyutasyottaram avasthan praptasya pūrvottarayor avasthayor aéritayoḥ savyāpāratvat pürvasya avasthaya vivaksāyām 67 satyam vikaraSabdasya tad-upagrahinos gaunatvam vijñāyate.
SP Vol. I, p. 159; AL p. 327.
atyanta-viparīto 'pi yatha yo'rtho 'vadhāryate / yathāsampratyayam babdas tatra mukhyab prayujyate// ācāryā& ca pūrve 'pi sarvatra tulyam eva Sabdasya pravrttinimittam bhavitum arhatiti manyamana buddhi-pratyavabhasa-mätrenaiva sabdasyarthesu pravsttim manyante.
vrtti yady api pratyayâdhinam artha-tattva
vadhāranam / na sarvah pratyayas tasmin prasiddha
iva jāyate //286/7 gauņa-mukhya-vyavastha-pravibhaga-vadinas tu manyantepratyayadhine "py artha-rüpasydvadharane kvacit tad-visayanām pratyayanām vyabhicarena" ya pravrttir loke saiva gauna-bhāvam vyavasthäpayati."
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 325.
suktikāyam tu pratyayadhine 'pi rajata-rupdvadharane kvacit tad-visayanām pratyayānam vyabhicarena ya pravsttiḥ saiva amukya-bhāvam vyavasthäpayati. yad ahayady api pratyayâdhinam artha-tattvåvadharanam/ na sarvaḥ pratyayas tasmin prasiddha iva jäyste //
vrttikatham? darśanam salile tulyam megatrşņâdi
darśanaiḥ /
prakrtir hi kacid upacarita-vikära-rupa, yatha indrasthuna upendro gräva iti. kācit pariņamini yatha-dugdham dadhi bhavati, hema kundalibhavati. tatra viparinäminişu prakstiņu sangha-mahattvadibhir mukhyair api yoge prvasya avasthayāḥ pracyutasyottarām avastham praptasya purvottarayor avasthayor aéritayoh savyäparatvät piirvasyäm avasthäyäm kartstva-vivakṣāyaḥ sanghamahad-adeh vikara-sabdasya prakstyupagrähino gaunalvan vijfayate. tad uklam-mahattvam sangha-bhāvam ca prakstih pratipadyate / bhedenåpekṣitā så tu gaunatVasya prasādhika //
* I do not understand the preceding part of the sentence. As no emendation has so far occurred to me, I have retained the manuscript reading.
#1AT, MTT prasiddhartham.
"AT, MTT indrasthüneti. I have supplied the two words in between from the quotation in the SP.
#AT, MTT parināminfti. The rest is supplied from the SP.
"AT, MTT pūrvasyam avasthayam. "AT, MTT apraptasya. " MTT afritayah.
7 AT vivak sayam; the SP reading kartstva-vivaksāyām. seems as probable as the reading accepted here.
* AT, MTT tadupagrahi.
49 AT, MTT anācāryā.
70 AT, MTT tulyaditabdapravsttim vyavacchidyante. I am not very sure of the emendation that I have introduced here.
1AT, MTT avyabhicarena. See the following footnote.
72 AT, MTT loke gaunamukhyabhävam vyavasthapayanti. The original reading of the sentence, which probably suffered through haplography, might have been as follows: ... pratyayanām vyabhicärena, kvacic cavyabhicarena ya pravrttir loke saiva gauna-mukhya-bhavam vyavasthāpayati.

Page #14

560
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
bhedāt tu sparsanadinām na jalam mrga
trşņikā //287//
yady api salila-rūpa-nirbhāsä сaksur-dvdrika tathabhūtaiva buddhir msgatronikasu jayate tathapi prasiddhānām7 sparsana-snāna-pānddinām abhāvāt, tad-dela- praptau cadarsanän nedam salilam iti täsu mogatrsnikasu násti mukhyasya Sabdasya pravrttih.
iha prasiddhartha-viparyaya-hetubhyaḥ santamasatimiropaghata-madya-vişa-pāna-maru-de&avasthanadibhyah prasiddhakāreşv arthesu darśana-viparyayo vijfayate. santamase 'nkurákara-mätram eva kevalam anyathopalabhyate. tat tu sparsanddibhir gathabhitam avadharyate. tathā rätrau pradīpa-samnidhānango nilotpaladinām varnabhedo laksyate. 81
ŚP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 325.
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 325.
megatrenāyām punar yady api salila-nirbhasä сaksurduärika tatha-bhutaiva buddhir utpadyate.tathapi sparsanasnāna-panadinam abhāvāt tad-desa-praptau cddarsanal nedam salilam iti pratyayena badhate. ahus ca-darsanam salile tulyam mrgatrenadi-darsanih / bhedat tu sparsanadinām na jalam megatrsņikā //
tatha rätrau pradīpa-dipti-samnipālal nilotpaladinam varna-bhedo laksyate. tatha hi na surya-rasmi-samparkal ghandragtfaffa-payah-prsatām iti mithyavanga-mukhyatvam. tad aha--prasiddharths-viparyäsa-nimittam yac ca dráyate / yas tasmäl laksate bhedas tam asatyam pracakşate //
vrttiyad asādhāraņam kāryam prasiddham
rajju-sarpayoh / tena bhedaḥ paricchedyas tayos tulye
'pi darśane //288//
vrttisparsa-prabandho hastena yathā cak
rasya santatah / na tathålāta-cakrasya, vicchinnam sprá
yate hi tat //291//
yady api rajju-dravye kadācid varna-samsthanaduarenale sarpa-buddhiḥ punaḥ76 punar utpadyate tathapi yat sadharanam darsanadi karyam tad apasya &väsagamana-dam sadibhir asadharanaih karyair mukhyasabda-visayah paricchidya vyavasthäpyate.
aläta-cakre 'pi83 ya cakra-buddhirga utpadyate tatra rüpa-prabandha-grahane84 vastu-sparsa-prabandha-grahanam hastena notpadyate. avicchinnabhinipatenaiva hi86 jyotisao nityavaruddha iva87 präyena tatra rāpa-grahanadeso rüpagrahana-käla 888 ca vibhavyate. kriya-virame tasya jyotiga & cakravad akaro nopalabhyate. tasmad ayathartham tad-grahanam avisayo mukhyasya $abdasyety avadharyate.
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 325.
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 325.
rajju-dravye yady api varna-samsthana-duarena sarpabuddhih punah punar utpadyate tathapi yat sadharanam kärsnyadairghyadi tad apāsya eväsa-damsdibhir asddharana-dharmair mukhya-vişayam paricchidya gaunatvam avadharyate. uktam ca-yad asādhāraṇam käryam prasiddham rajju-sarpayoh / tena bhedah paricchedyas tayoḥ svalpe 'pi darśane //
alata-cakre 'pi cakra-buddhau cakşuşa rupa-prabandh - avagrahavat na hastena sparsa-prabandho 'vagrhyate. kriyavirame ca tasya jyotisać cakravad akaro nopalabhyate. avicchinnabhinipätenaiva hi jyotisa nityavaruddha iva
vrttinirjñāte ca bhede - prasiddhartha-viparyāsa-nimittam yac
ca drsyate / yas tasmăl laksyate bhedas tam asatyam
pracaksate //289//
re.
76 AT, MTT santamasantamivopaghatamanyavisayapadanamatra desăvasthanadibhyah.
80 MTT sannidhanām.
81 The rest of the vrtti of verse 289, being irrelevant, is not reproduced here.
89 AT, MTT hi. ** MTT yācakabuddhir. 84 AT, MTT -grahaņa-. 86 AT, MTT avicchinnabhighatena. 86 AT jyotişam; MTT jyotişam.
87 AT, MTT nitya eva. I have accepted the SP reading here, but I do not know its exact meaning in the present context.
88 AT, MTT -grahanottarakalam.
* AT, MTT bhavyate. MTT reads kijca after this word.
# AT, MTT jyotis.
78 AT and MTT read this word after lasu in the concluding clause.
74 MTT reads samskāra as well as samsthāna. 16 This word is missing in AT and MTT. 76 AT, MTT tathayam. 77 AT, MTT -darsanadibhir. 78 AT, MTT kāryam.

Page #15

AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bharthari
prayena tatra rupa-grahana-deso rupa-grahana-kalas ca vibhāvyate. tasmad apartham tad-grahanam avisayo mukhyasya sabdasyeti. uktam ca-sparsa-prabandho hastena yatha cakrasya santataḥ / na tathalāta-cakrasya vicchinnam sprøyate hi tat //
vrtti
vapra-prākāra-talpais ca spartanávarane yath/
nagareșu, na te tadvad gandharva-nagaregv api //292//
yatha ca vapradibhir mukhyesu nagareşu gacchatām pratighāto dasyu-bhaya-rakşâdini ca karyāņi prakalpante na tatha gandharva-nagaresu. tad-desasthairs eva tani na dréyanta iti na lesam mukhya-sabda-viṣayatvam vidyate.
ŚP Vol. II, pp. 364–366; AL p. 326.
tatra yatha vapradibhir mukhyeşu nagareşu gacchatam pratighato dasyu-bhaya-rakṣadini ca kāryani ca prakalpante na tatha gandharva-nagareşu tad-desasthair eva ca tani na drsyante iti na teşam mukhya-sabda-vişayatvam. tad aha-vapra-prākāra-talpais ca sparsanâvarane yatha / nagareşu tatha naivam gandharva-nagareşu te// vythi
mrga-pavadibhir yävän mukhyair arthah prasidhyate/
tāvān na mṛnmayesv asti tasmat te viṣayah kanaḥ //293//
iha mukhyā mrga-pasvadayo dṛṣṭadṛṣṭa-phalesv arthesv arambhanalambhana-proksana-visasanadisus yatha sa
dhanatvena vyavatiṣṭhante na tatha mṛnmayā dārumayā vā. tasmat kasyacid eva sadréasya dharmasya bhavad upamānopameya-bhava-sambandhe sati 'ive pratikṛtāv (Pan
ini 5.3.96) ityetat-prakaraṇa-vihitānām pratyayānām utpattau nimittatvams labhante.
SP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL pp. 324-325.
tathahi mrga-pasvadayaḥ kasyacid eva sadrśasya dharmasya bhāvāt upamanopameya-sambandhe sati ive
91 AT, MTT pratighatâdyubhayarakşâdīni.
92 MTT yatha. Both AT and MTT omit na, which is supplied here on the strength of the context and the SP reading.
93 AT, MTT tadetatsthair.
94 AT and MTT omit this word.
95 AT, MTT artheşveva viruddhabhakṣaṇaprokṣaṇavisasanâdişu. For the reading adopted here, see the Mahābhāṣya on Panini 1.2.64 (Kielhorn, Vol. I, p. 244. 15-16) and Sabara on 1.3.9/30 (Anandâśrama edition, p. 300).
96 AT, MTT nimittam.
pratikṛtāv ityeva prakarana-vihitanam pratyayānām utpattau nimittatvam labhante. yuktam caitat. yataḥmrga-paśvādibhir yavan mukhyair arthaḥ prasadhyate na tavan mṛnmayesv asti tasmat te viṣayaḥ kutaḥ // etena pratimâdisu vasudevâdayo vyakhyātāḥ, yatha hi te mukhya vara-pradana-danavocchedâdi-karmasu sädhantvena vyavatisṭhante na tathā grāvamayā vā dārumayā vā.
vrtti
mahan ävriyate deśab prasiddhaib parvatsdibhib /
alpa-desintarivastham pratibimbam tu dréyate //294//
561
yesam api pratibimbam parvatâdi-sarupam ādarśâdişu jayate teşam api dréyamanam tats pramana-bhedend" yatharthatvenâvasiyate. tena hi prakṛṣṭa-desa-vyapina100 bhavitavyam. na câdarśasyântariyo deśaḥ101 sambhavati.
ŚP Vol. II, pp. 364-366; AL p. 326.
pratibimbam tu hastyādi-sarupam ādarśanâdişu dṛśyamanam api pramana-bhedena ayathartham avasiyate. hastyádi-pramänena prakṛṣṭa-desa-vyāpinā bhavitavyam. na ca adarśasyântariyo deśaḥ sambhavati. tad uktammahan avriyate deso mukhyaiḥ stamberamâdibhiḥ / alpa-desântarâvastham pratibimbam tu drøyate //
8.3. In the preceding section, I have pointed out fourteen undeniable instances of borrowing by the author of the SP from the Vākya-kāṇḍavrtti. I may add that the vrtti on verse 152 is partly utilised in SP, Vol. I, pp. 213-214 (Raghavan 1963: 726-727). If one guesses by content and style, one may say that many more passages are likely to be borrowings; e.g. Vol. I, pp. 104.19105.18; pp. 111.23-112.20; Vol. II, p. 333 (AL p. 321). In this connection, Raghavan's (1940: 23; 1963: 729-735) remark that the ninth chapter of the SP contains a long quotation from the Vakyapadiya and that it depends heavily on the Vakyapadiya, is very significant.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abhyankar, K. V. and V. P. Limaye. 1965. See Bharthari
(b).- 1967. (Eds.) Mahabhasya-dipika of Bhartrhari. Part I. Bhandarkar Oriental Research In
97 AT, MTT -sarupadarśanâdişu.
98 AT, MTT drsyamänatat-. "AT, MTT -bhedena.
100 AT, MTT teṣām hi sparsarūpaprakṛṣṭadeśavyāpī. 101 AT, MTT na yantaradarsanaścādesas.

Page #16

562
Journal of the American Oriental Society, 89.3 (1969)
stitute. Post-graduate and Research Department
Series No. 8. Poong. Belvalkar, S. K. 1938. (Compiler) Descriptive Catalogue
of the Government Collections of Manuscripts deposited at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Vol. II. Grammar: Part I (Vedic and Paniniya). Bhan
darkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona. Bharthari. (a) kända 1. (Ed.) Subramania Iyer, K. A.
Vakyapadīya of Bharthari with the výtti, and the Paddhati of Vrsabhadeva. Deccan College Monograph Series. No. 32. 1966. Poona. - (b) kânda 2. kārikās: (Eds.) Abhyankar, K. V. and V. P. Limaye. Vakyapadīya of Bhartyhari. University of Poona Sanskrit and Prakrit Series. Vol. II. 1965. Poona. vrtti: See sections 6.1-3 above. Charudeva Shastri's incomplete edition was published by the Ramlal Kapoor Trust, Lahore. fika: See footnote 6. (Ed.) Mānavalli, Gangādhara Sastri. Vakyapadiyam... Sri-Bhartshari. . . . -vi- ractiam Sri-Punyarāja-ksta-prakāšakhya-{īkā-yutam. Benares Sanskrit Series. Nos. 11, 19 Ind 24. 1887. Benares. - (c) kanda 3. With Helārāja's commentary. samuddesas 1-7: (Ed.) Subramania Iyer, K. A. Deccan College Monograph Series. No. 21. 1963. Poona. samuddesas 8-13: (Ed.) Sämbasiva Sastri, K. Trivan- drum Sanskrit Series. No. CXVI. 1935. Trivandrum. samuddesa 14: (Ed.) Ravi Varma, L. A. University of Travancore Sanskrit Series. No. CXLVIII. 1942.
Trivandrum Biardeau, Madeleine. 1964 (Ed. and transl.) Vakya
padiya Brahmakanda avec la urtti de Harivrsabha. Publications de l'Institut de Civilisation Indienne.
Série IN-89. Fascicule 24. Paris. BSS. See Bharthari (b). Charudeva Shastri. 1930. "Bharthari: & critical study
with special reference to the Vākyapadiya and its commentaries." Proceedings of the All India Oriental Congress, fifth session. Pp. 630-665. Lahore. - 1934. (Ed.) Vakyapadiyam Prathamam Kandam.
Ramlal Kapoor Trust. Lahore. Durveka-misra. Dharmottara-pradīpa. Tibetan Sanskrit
Works Series No. 2. 1955. Patna. Helārāja. See Bharthari (e). Hiriyanna, M. 1938. "Vyāļi and Vājapyāyana." Indian
Historical Quarterly. Vol. 14:261-266. I-ching. A Record of Buddhist Religion as practised in
India and the Malay Archipelago. Translated by J.
Takakusu. Reprint 1966. Delhi. Jayaditya. Kasika. (Ed.) Sobhita Miøra. Kasi Samsksta
Granthamālā. No. 37. 1952. Banaras. Josyer. See Yadugiri Svāmi. Kielhorn, F. 1880/1881. Report on the Search for Sanskrit MSS. in the Bombay Presidency. Bombay.
1883. "On the grammarian Bharthari." Indian Antiquary. Vol. 12:226-227.
Kunhan Raja, C. 1936. "I-tsing and Bharthari's Väkys
padiya." S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar Comm. Vol.
Pp. 285-298. Madras. Mänavalli. See Bhartshari (b) Oppert, Gustav. 1880, 1885. Lists of Sanskrit Manuscripts
in Private Libraries of Southern India. Vol. I and II.
Madras. Parvatiya Visvesvara-sūri. Vyakarana-siddhanta-sudha
nidhiḥ. Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series. Nos. 193, 194, 195, 215, 216, 218, 251, 252, 275, 276, 300, 306,
312, 321,329. Edited by various scholars. 1914–1924. Pathak, K. B. 1894. "Bharthari and Kumărila." Journal
of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society.
Vol. XVIII:213-238. Prabhakara. Brhati of Prabhakara Misra with the Rju
vimaläpañcika of Salikanātha. (Ed.) Rāmanātha Süstri, S. K. Madras University Sanskrit Series.
No. 3. 1934. Madras. Punyarāja. See Bhartshari (b). Raghavan Nambiar, Siromaņi Nyāya-bhūşaņa. 1942.
An Alphabetical List of Manuscripts in the Oriental Institute, Baroda. Vol. I. Gaekwad's Oriental Series
No. XCVII. Baroda. Raghavan, V. 1940. Bhoja's Srngara-prakasa. Karnatak
Publishing House, Bombay. - 1963. Bhoja's Srngāra-prakāta. Punarvasu.
Madras. Rājendralala Mitra. 1877. A Descriptive Catalogue of
Sanskrit MSS, in the Library of the Asiatic Society
of Bengal. Part I. Calcutta. - 1886. Notices of Sanskrit Manuscripts. Vol. VIII.
Calcutta. Rāmagovinda Sukla. 1961. Hindi introduction to the
Bhavapradipa commentary on the Brahma-kända of the Väkyapadiya. Kasi Samsksta Grantha-mala.
No. 124. Varanasi. Ramakrishna Kavi, M. 1930. "The discovery of the
author's vrtti on the Vākyapadiya." Journal of the
Andhra Historical Research Society. Vol. IV:235-241. Rangaswamy Iyengar, H. R. 1951. "Bharthari and
Dinnaga." Journal of the Bombay Branch of the
Royal Asiatic Society. New Series. No. 26:147-149. Rau, Wilhelm. 1962. "Uber sechs Handschriften des
Väkyapadiya." Oriens. Vol. 15:374-398. — 1964. "Handschriften des Vākyapadiya." Oriens.
Vol. 17:182-198. Ravi Varmā. See Bharthari (c). Ruegg, David Seyfort. 1959. Contributions a l'histoire de
la philosophie linguistique indienne. Paris. Sadhu Ram. 1952. "Bhartshari's date." Journal of the
Ganganath Jha Oriental Research Institute. Vol. 9:
135-151. - 1956. "Authorship of some kärikäs and fragments
ascribed to Bharthari.” Journal of the Ganganath
Jha Oriental Research Institute. Vol. 13: 51-79. Sālikanatha. See Prabhākara.

Page #17
AKLUJKAR: Two Textual Studies of Bhartrhari 563 Subrahmanya Sastri, P. P. 1939/1942. (Ed.) Srngara prakasa. Part I. Prakasas 1 and 2. Srirangam Sri Sankara-gurukula Series. No. 7. Sri Vani Vilas Press, Srirangam. Subramania Iyer, K. A. 1963a. Sanskrit introduction to the Ambakartri commentary on the Brahma-kanda of the Vakyapadiya. Sarasvati Bhavana Granthamala. Vol. 91. Varanasi. - 1963b. See Bhartshari (c). - 1965. (Transl.) The Vakyapadiya of Bhartyhari with the vrtti. Chapter I. Deccan College Building Centenary and Silver Jubilee Series. No. 26. Poona. -- 1966. See Bhartshari (a). Swaminathan, V. 1965. (Ed.) Mahabhasya-dipika. Hindu Vishvavidyalaya Nepal Rajya Sanskrit Series. No. 11. Banaras. Vrsabha. See Bhartrhari (a). Yadugiri Svami. 1955. (Ed.) Sringara Prakasa. First eight chapters. Revised and edited by G. R. Josyer. Mysore. Yudhisthira Mimamsaka. Samvat 2019. Samskyta Vya karana-sastra ka Itihasa. Dvitiya bhaga. Ajmer. - 2020. Revised edition of Vol. I of the same. Ajmer.