Mahavidya Vidambanam

SR No.: 020464
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Vadindra Bhatt, Anandpurna, Bhuvansundarsuri, Mangesh R Telang
Publisher: Central Library
Publication Year: 1920
Total Pages: 247
Language: Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari
File Size: 16 MB

Page 29

xxiv
Ánandapûrņa, author of the Vidyasagari commentary on Sriharshá's Khandana, while explaining the passage "असती सा न विशेषिका'&c, quotes two verses from Kumarila Bhatta's Ślokavártika, states that they have been conmented upon by Umbeka (t#?) and reproduces his interpretation of them.' ___In the 29th Chapter (भेदाभेद निराकरण प्रकरण) of तत्त्वशुद्धि by बोथघनाचार्य (about A. D. 1000) occurs the remark-''अयं तु क्षपणकपक्षादपि पापीयानुम्बेकपक्ष इत्युपेक्ष्यते।"
TheJain author Gunaratna (A.D.1409) in his Shad-darshana-samuchaya. Vritti" says that there are many schools of Mîmánsá and cites the following verse:--
ओ(उ?)म्बेकः कारिकां वेत्ति तन्त्रं वेत्ति प्रभाकरः ।
वामनस्तूभयं वेत्ति न किञ्चिदपि रेवणः । In this verse it is said that Ombeka kuows the Karikas. Now the Karikás meant here must be the Kárikás or the verses of Slokavártika, for Pratygrûpabhagavan and Anandapurna as mentioned above inform us that Umbeka has commented upon the same. ___Mr. S. P. Pandit in note Iv pages ccv-ccvI of his Introduction to Vákpati's Goudavaho ( Bombay Sanskrit series No XXXIV ) states that in a manuscript of Bhavabhuti's Málatîmádhava,3 at the end of Act III the following sentence appeared:-इति श्रीभट्टकुमारिलशिष्यकृते मालतीमाधवे तृतीयोऽङ्कः. The colophon at the end of Act X of the same Manuscript was fasita.gagfafarfala मालतीमाधवे दशमोऽङ्कः.
Thus all the above statements put together lead us to conclude that the poet Bhavabhûti was known also by the name Umbeka*, that he was a pupil of the great Mimánsaka Kumárila Bhatta and that he had written a commentary on his preceptor's great work Slokavártika. So long we knew Bhavabhuti only as a dramatist but now lie must be considered to have been a
1 असतीति तदुक्तम्
संवृतेननु सत्यत्वं सत्यभेदः कुतो न्वयम् । सत्या चेत्संवृतिः केयं मृषाचेत्सत्यता कथम् ॥ सत्यत्वं न च सामान्यं मृषार्थपरमार्थयोः।
विरोधान्नहि वृक्षत्वं सामान्य वृक्षसिंहयोः ॥ इति (श्लोकवार्तिक पृ. २१८) तदिदं श्लोकद्वयमुवैकैन (मुम्बेकेन ?) व्याख्यातम्-" न हि संवृतिपरमार्थयोः सत्यत्वं नाम सामान्यम् एकत्र विरोधात् , अपरत्र पौनरुक्त्यप्रसङ्गात् " इति ।
खण्डन पृ. ७५ (चौखम्बा) 2. Gunaratna's Shad-darshana-samuchaya-Vritti, p. 20 (Bibliotheca Indica)
3. Mr. Pandit says in a footnote that the manuscript appeared to be 400-500 years old and belonged to his friend Mr. Mahadeva Venkatesh Lele, B.A., L.C.E. of Indore. ___4. The name is differently written. Pratyagrupa-bhagavān writes it as उम्बक and उम्बेक. बोधघन writes it as उम्बेक and Anandapurna as उवैक and Gunaratna mentions it as
ओम्बेक. Mr. Pandit's Manuscript gives it as उवेक. These variations seem to hare originated in the ignorance of the copyists.