________________
(
269 )
It begins thus :
अथ बाधयुक्तिप्रतिबन्धकता विचार्यते ।
तत्तद्धर्मावच्छिन्नविशेष्यताकतत्तद्भाववत्तानिर्णयकाले तत्तद्धर्मावच्छिन्नविशेष्यताकतद्दिशियबुद्धेरनुदयात् पर्वतत्वावच्छिन्नविशेष्यताकसंयोगादिसंसर्गकवहित्वाद्यवच्छिन्नप्रकारताशाल्यलौकिकज्ञानत्वावच्छिन्नं प्रति पर्वतत्वावच्छिन्नविशेष्यताकदैशिकविशेषणतासंसर्गकसंयोगादिसंसर्गावच्छिन्नवहत्वाद्यवच्छिन्नप्रतियोगिताकाभावप्रकार
कानाहार्याप्रामाण्यज्ञानानास्कन्दितनिर्णयत्वेन प्रतिबन्धकत्वं कल्पाते ॥ The author of the work is unknown.
7868. 733.
For the manuscript, see L. 1593, in which it is called without any justification, Pravartaka-jñāna-nirūpaña. The name of the work cannot be ascertained, the manuscript being incomplete at the end. It is a work on Vidhi based on Vidhivāda in Tattvacintāmani, Part IV and its commentary by Pakşadhara Miśra or Rucidatta. It comes after उच्छन्नप्रच्छन्नवादः. He also quotes from Bhatta and Guru, that is, Kumārila Bhatta and Prabhākara Guru. He seems to be inclined more to the Naiyāyika school than to that of Mīmāmsā. He seems to have written a work entitled Anumānaniruktiprakāśa. In leaf 1 he says:
उपपादितं चानुमाननिरुक्तिप्रकाशे प्रकृतघटकत्वस्याप्युपोद्घातसङ्गतित्वमस्माभिरिति ।
7869. 927.
Substance, country-made paper. 11 x 5 inches. Folia, 22. Lines, 8 on a page. Extent in slokas, 325. Character, Nāgara. Appearance, old. Generally correct.
It is called on the front-leaf, विशिष्टवैशिट्यावगाही वादार्थः. But the name does not appear anywhere in the body of the manuscript, nor the name of the author.
Aufrecht registers a work of the same name by Raghudeva. His authority is Oppert, II, 9366. We have no means of ascertaining whether the work under notice is the same or not.
