Sambodhi 2002 Vol 25

SR No.: 520775
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah, N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2002
Total Pages: 234
Language: English, Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Magazine, India_Sambodhi, & India
File Size: 5 MB

Page 111

106
NARAYAN PRASAD
SAMBODHI
In
sūtras and paribhāsās with their commentaries and sub-commentaries was not tedious for him !
In "Ācārya Hemacandra aur unkā sabdānuśāsan” (1963), pp. 101-102, Nemicandra Šāstrī remarks :
(i) The Bhoja grammar is heavily loaded with paribhāṣā. It can be said in express terms that the above-mentioned grammar cannot be understood . without the knowledge of Pāninian grammar. Only an expert in Panini can understand it well. Regarding paribhāsā it appears essential that the knowledge of the Pāṇini grammar be gained first .... Bhojarāja has collected all the paribhāsa-sūtras found in Paribhasendusekhara. Due to this an initial complexity appears in this work.
---With the above remarks Nemicandra Šāstri has only strengthened the statement that the SKĀ is nothing but the great revised edition of Pānini and supports also the view of Robert Birwé who says in his article mentioned earlier : "I doubt very much that the understanding of the SKĀ is impossible without the vrtti, as maintained by K. Sambaśiva Šāstri. There is, I am convinced of it, no serious difficulty, not to speak of impossibility, to understand it for anyone fully conversant with Pāṇini's Astādhyāyī and the main works of his followers” (p. 152). It is always preferable to have all the information implied by the sūtrakāra at one place. Nemicandra Šāstrī has expressed the view that Hemacandra has kept his grammar free from the burden of paribhāsā. But in order to fully understand the grammar of Hemacandra, Hemahamsagani has compiled 141 paribhāṣāsthe largest number of paribhāsā in Sanskrit grammar ! Out of these, 57 paribhāsās have been cited by Hemacandra himself in his auto-commentary Brhadvrtti.
(ii) Bhojarāja's treatment of the feminine affixes is very complicated.
---Nemicandra Šāstrī has compared the SKĀ with the brevity of Haima grammar in which the accent part has been neglected. Naturally the affixes nis, nip and nin are changed to a single affix ni. That cannot happen in case of a work like the Astādhyāyi and SKĀ where accent is also taken into account. He shows happiness over the fact that Hema has only one sūtra 'ajādeh' regarding the feminine affix, whereas Bhoja has constructed 13 sūtras for the same affix tāp, III. 4. 2-14. It is to be noted that Bhoja had to construct so many sütras as exceptions to the affix nīs.