Indian Antiquary Vol 16

SR No.: 032508
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: John Faithfull Fleet, Richard Carnac Temple
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 408
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 18 MB

Page 267

AUGUST, 1887.)
NOTES ON THE MAHABHASHYA.
245
word which in his opinion should have been we are told that oar objection is futile, because distinctly mentioned by Påņini (Vol. II. (yogapéksham jnapakam) 'the jñápaka (TL p. 279).
in VI. 3, 34) has reference to the whole rule That jñápakas are often and rightly made use (IV. 1, 87),' i.e. Pâņini, by employing , of in the Mahâbhâshya to establish the validity indirectly teaches that the whole rule for Pånini's grammar of certain general maxims IV. 1,.87 is superseded by V. 1, 115. This or Paribhashâs, I have had frequent occasions example of a yôgápéksha jñápaka naturally to show in my edition of the Paribhashandusé leads me on tokhara. Here, too, maxims may be deduced from 2. Nipatana. By incidentally employing some peculiar wording of the Sûtras, which a word or any form whatever, Pâņini shows pogsibly have never presented themselves to that that word or that form is correct; and Pånini himself; and occasionally as in Vol. I. if such a word or form should happen to be p. 486, Vol. II. p. 64, and elsewhere) the com- contrary to any rule of his, that rule must, in mentators themselves differ both as regards the this particular instance, be understood to be validity of a particular maxim and the jhapaka superseded. The incidental employment of a by means of which such maxim is sought to be word or form is thus like a special role superestablished. It is strange, that Påņini should seding a general rule. In the initial have employed the same Anubandha in the dental) of 147 should by P. VIII. 4, 3 be first and in the sixth of the so-called Siva- changed to the (lingual) L ; but that change sůtras, because by doing so he has made it does not take place, because Påņini in I. 1, 27 difficult for us to decide whether the Pratya- puts down THT. with a (dental) (Vol. hâras art and r are formed with the first I. p. 86). On P. III. 3, 90 Katyayana deor with the second it. But did Påņini really mands a special rale, to teach that the root adopt this stratagem in order to suggest that before the suffix is not by P. VI. 1, in every doubtful case of this kind we should 16 changed to Tot; in other words, that 75+ have recourse to the traditional) interpretation T -7, not th. According to Patañjali, of his rules (Vol. I. p. 35), -a maxim to which no such special rule is needed, because Panini Patañjali draws our attention no less than a employs the word in III. 2, 117. (Vol. II. dozen times in the course of his discussions? I p. 151). On P. I. 1, 47 Katyayana makes a
On P. V.1, 115 Kâtyâyana gives the special special rule to account for 75T and if rule, placed in the Mahâbhâshya under V.1, Patañjali considers such a rale superfluous, 118, that the suffix is added also to fait because Panini has the two words in his Ganas and tą, to form
and jer. Kåtgå- (Vol. I. p. 115). yana considers such a rule necessary, because 3. Anabhidhana.°-Grammar is not to without it the suffixes and a taught invent new words or new meanings, but has to for at and in P. IV. 1, 87, would super- concern itself with existing words only, to sede the suffix T of P. V. 1, 115. Accord show which are right words, and to explain ing to Patañjali, on the other hand, Påņini their formation and usage. The grammarian himself shows that the suffixes taught in IV. need not take into account any possible wrong 1, 87 do not sapersede the suffix o, inasmuch words which nobody would think of emas he uses the word ger in his rule VI. 3, 34. ploying; he does his duty if he gives his And when we object, that even so there would rules in such a manner as to account for the be no reason why we should form also a right words, and to exclude wrong words
Patañjali in Vol. I. p. 83, Vol. II. pp. 81, 288, 347, ine. देष्टव्याः साधुत्वेन प्रतिपाया एते सूने निबध्यन्ते प्रसङ्गोन 36. Compare also avileshena jadpakam in Vol. II. p. 110. The expression yógápékshari jñapakam has been
साधृत्वप्रतिपादनार्थम्. curioualy misunderstood in the late Prof. Goldstücker's • Kátykyana, in Vol. I. p. 194; Vol. II. pp. 12, 13, 94, Parini, p. 116.
146, 234, 371, 325; Vol. III. p. 365; and in other pas. • Katykyans in Vol. I. pp. 52, 86, 478 ; Vol. II. sages, where anbhidhana is referred to by the word p. 406; Vol. III. pp. 103, 106, 123, 194, 255; (compare or the phrase na. Patanjali in Vol. I. p. 177: also 455). Patañjali twice as often. In Vol. II. p. 224
Vol. II. pp. 25, 250, 274, 307, 308, 309, 319, 334, Patañjali refers us by the phrase
f r ee to 341, 351, 368, 382 (twice), 387, 395, 398, 899. I may Varttika of Katykyana's.
perhapa draw attention to the fact, that most of these
references are to Vol. II. of the MahAbhAshya, which, . Compare Vol. II. p. 418 141. Falara
generally speaking, treats of Krit and Taddhita-suffixes.