Two Textual Studies Of Bhartrhari

SR No.: 269280
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Ashok Aklujkar
Publisher: Ashok Aklujkar
Total Pages: 17
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 3 MB

Page 3

AKLUJKAR: Two T'extual Studies of Bhartrhari
549
the main body of the work and that it enjoyed 3.1. Considerations introduced in points (a) relative independence.
to (h) of the last section should be sufficient to (f) I-ching (p. 180) records a commentary by show that the division of Bhartphari's monuDharmapāla on the Prakirnaka? only, thus testi- mental work into two main parts dates from as fying that the Prakīrnaka was considered to be a far back as the author's time. What remains to relatively independent book in his time.
be proved is the thesis that the first part was (g) On the basis of the information given in called Vākyapadīya. Some facts which are in favor various catalogues of manuscripts, one can say of this view are noted below, followed by a disthat there are about 25 manuscripts (mostly cussion of possible objections. incomplete) of the Prakīrnaka-prakāśa, Helā- (a) A number of manuscripts of the Trikāndi rāja's commentary on the third kända, in exist- contain the words "samäpta Vakyapadiya-kārikā" ence. It is significant that a commentary on at the end of the second kända. either the first or the second kānda is not found (b) Helārāja refers to the first two books by in any of these manuscripts. They contain only the title Väkyapadiya not less than nine timeslo: the commentary on the third kändas although "vistarendgama-prāmānyam Vakyapadiye 'smāHelārāja states in no unclear terms at the very bhiḥ prathama-kände Sabda-prabhāyām nirnibeginning that he commented on the first two tam..."3.1.46, p. 54: Compare 1.27-43, pp. books as well. This independence unanimously 81-100. given to a commentary on the third book is "tasya cid-rūpasya cicchaktir apariņāminiti satisfactorily explained only if an old tradition vikārabhāvān nedam Sānkhya-nayavat pariņāmaof regarding that book as a composition mostly darśanam api tu vivarta-pakşah. viseşaś canayor complete in itself is presumed.
Vakyapadiye 'smābhir vyākyāta iti...” 3.2.15, (h) Introductory verses (including one bene- p. 119: Compare 1.1, pp. 8-9. dictory verse) which usually indicate the be- "śrotâpi ca tathaiva sva-vāsanā-vikāsânusārena ginning of a commentary either on an independent pratipădyate samāvista-sabda-bhāvanah, tena codwork or on a relatively independent book of a bodhita-sabda-bhavanah pravartata iti nirnitam voluminous work, are found at the beginning of Vākyapadiye." 3.3.32, p. 146: Compare 1.53, the Prakirnaka-prakäsa. They are not found at p. 113. the beginning of the commentary on the second "tantrena hi sakti-dvayam apy abhidadhāti kānda (see footnote 6).
pratyaya iti Vakyapadīye nirnītam." 3.7.84, p.
300: Compare 2.98-102, 455-477, BSS pp. 1247 So far I-ching's has been the only known reference to
126, 281-283. Most probably Helārāja has in Dharmapala's commentary on the Prakirnaka. Recently,
mind a portion of the vrtti that is missing in the I have come across one more reference to that work. only available manuscript (6.2 below). Durvekamiéra, in his Dharmottara-pradīpa, says: "tatha "ata eva svātantrya-saktih kala iti Vakyapadīye hi Prakirna-vrttikrd-Dharmapalenapi vidha-tabdah pra- siddhäntitam adhyāhita-kalām yasya kala-saktim käravaci pradarsitah. na punar asydyam abhiprāyaḥ vidha (dha)-tabdo jāti-vacitvat prakāra-väci na bhavatiti. upusry (1.000, p. 10) wy aura. 3.9.14, p. 04. anekarthatvat tasya prakāra-vācino 'pi prayogasya 'catastsu caivamvidhäsu tattvam parisamäpyate' (Nydya
same as manuscript à used by Abhyankar-Limaye (1965: bha., p. 2) ityadav anena prāygo dystatvat." Compare
II) which they describe as containing only the first Helārāja 3.1.1, p. 2.10-14.
and the second kanda with commentary. Raghavan Nambiar's catalogue of manuscripts in Mänavalli, p. 1.16-17; Charudeva Shastri 1930: 631, the library of the Oriental Institute at Baroda (1942: 1934:8: Sadhu Ram 1952: 136 fn. 5: Yudhisthira Mimām718-719) says that MS 319/1987 contains commentaries saka samvat 2019: 349; Abhyankar-Limaye 1965: 57 fn. 6; of the second and the third kāņdas; but this seems to be Rau 1962:378, 380, 382, 1964: 184, 189, 191. an error from the fact that the manuscript is described 10 One more occurrence of the word Vakyapadiya in As having only 66 leaves and an extent of only 4,800 Helārāja's commentary is taken up for consideration in granthas or Slokas. Moreover, it is, most probably, the 3.2d below.