Siddhi Vinischay Tika Part 01

SR No.: 004038
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Anantviryacharya
Publisher: Bharatiya Gyanpith
Publication Year: 1944
Total Pages: 686
Language: Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 15 MB

Page 105

INTRODUCTION it can be surmised that either it belonged to the other Anantavirya or to the other work of Anantavirya, the author of SVT. It will be shown in the following pages that there is one work, Pramānasamgrahabhāsya, written by Anantavirya which includes a chapter on Saptabharigi ; may be, the verses referred to above are from this work. The period of Sayanācārya is Sake 1312 (1390 A.D.)1.
From the foregoing discussion emerge out the following Anantaviryas :
(i) Anantavīryayati referred by Akalarka in his Tattvārthavārtika. (ii) Anantavirya quoted by Ravibhadrapadopajīvi i.e, Anantavīrya,
the commentator of SV of Akalanka. (iii) Anantavirya, the author of the present commentary on
Siddhiviniscaya. (iv) Lastly, Anantavirya, the author of Prameyaratnamālā who refers
to PKM of Pabhācandra. Out of these four Anantaviryas, the one referred to by Akalanka in his TV, the first of all his works, must be a prior Acārya to Akalanka himself, naturally he cannot be the Akalarka-Sūtravrttikära referred in the
above mentioned inscription. It has been seen already that Prameyaratnamālā was written by Anantavirya at the request of Hirap2, this author is definitely later than Prabhācandra, the author of Prameyakamalamārtanda. The commentator Anantavirya, the author of SVT who is gratefully remembered by Prabhācandra is a certainly different person from Anantavirya, the author of Prameyaratnamāla, who himself seems to be much obliged to Prabhācandra. Now the problem remains in regard to vrddha Anantavirya and Anantavirya, the author of SVT. As regards the vrddha Anantavirya we do not have any work at all ; naturally nothing can be said about his works and age etc. in the absence of any positive evidence about him, all that can be said is that he is referred to in SVT by Anantavirya and that the way of examining his views show that he must have been a senior contemporary of Anantavirya.
About the Anantavirya referred to by santyācārya, Vadidevasūri and Sāyaṇamādhavācārya in their respective works, we are not in any better position to say as to which of the two commentators they are referring, vrddha Anantavīrya or Anantavīrya. It can be seen that out of these two
1 Sarvadarśana samgraha, Intro. p. 33. ? Vaijeyapriyaputrasya Hirapasyoparodhatah Säntisenärthamārabdhva Pariksāmukha
Pañjika. (Prameyaratnamāla Prasasti)