Upnishad

SR No.: 007670
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Max Muller
Publisher: Oxford
Publication Year: 1879
Total Pages: 1835
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 35 MB

Page 1367

INTRODUCTION.
xxxvii
Professor Weber in his review of Goldstücker's 'Pânini.' The interpretation of the vârttika adopted in the Kâsikâ Vritti-according to which Pânini's rule does not apply to those works, because Yâgñavalkya and others are not old authorities in the sense of Pânini's rule-is likewise rejected by him, since in that case Kâtyâyana's exception would be no exception at all. On the other hand, Professor Weber thinks that, if we accept Kaiyata's interpretation, Kâtyâyana's additional remark 'on account of contemporaneousness' would be entirely superfluous. He, therefore, proposes, in the passage of the Mahabhâshya, to take 'api' in the sense of 'even,' and to interpret the passage thus1: 'Among the Brahmanas and Kalpas proclaimed by the ancients, Pânini ought to have made an exception in regard to Yâgñavalkya &c., because the Brahmanas and Kalpas proclaimed by them, though indeed going back to ancient (sages), are nevertheless contemporaneous (with Pânini himself).' This rather paradoxical argumentation, on the part of Patangali, would have to be understood to mean, that the Yagnavalkâni Brâhmanâni and similar works, though ascribed to old authorities, are in reality modern productions; or-if we may venture to express it in somewhat different words-Pânini ought to have made an exception in regard to works which, in point of fact, are no exception at all. Now, if this be the correct interpretation, I can only say thisthat, had Patangali been anxious to conceal his real meaning, he could scarcely have done so more effectually than by choosing words which, at first sight, look as clear as day.
Professor Bühler2, who has recently touched upon this controversy, sides with Kaiyata and Goldstücker; and I, too, can take no other view. But, like him, I see no necessity for accepting the inferences which Goldstücker has drawn from this vârttika, viz. that we have to assume so long an interval between Pânini and Kâtyâyana, that authors, whom Kâtyâyana considered as far older than Pânini, were in reality his contemporaries. This assumption, surely, would involve a degree of ignorance, on the part of
1 Ind. Stud. V, 68 seq.; XIII, 443.
Sacred Laws of the Aryas, I, p. xxxix note.
Google
Digitized by