________________
468
THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN
CATTLE, FIELD AND BARLEY
469
have a more general statement corresponding to the topic of sasyanāša, -vindsa, -upaghata, etc.?
Reference is to the edition of the Padamarljari contained in: The Kafikavrtti.... Pl. I, critically edited by Swami Dwarika Das Shastri and Pt. Kalika Prasad Shukla, Varanasi 1965.
97 cf. fn. 21.
28 cf. also Visvesvarasüri's Vyākaranasiddhantasudhanidhi, Benares 1924, 861. 25 f.: yavabhakşane tatsuamino á himsd.
1 The edition has in both cases fasya. 30 cf. fn. 21.
31 I quote from the cdition of Dr. Sitarama Shastri, Praudhamanoramd of Sri Bhaffoji Dikshita together with Brhacchabdaratna, an unpublished commentary of Sri Hari Dikshita, and Laghusabdaratna of Sri Nagesa Bhatja, Ist Vol., Varanasi 1964.
* viz. in the edition of Pdt. Gopal Shastri Nene, Benares 1929, 138. 1-3. Cf. also JMånendra Sarasvati's Tattuabodhini, and Siddhantakaumudi 1. c.
* I quote from Ma. Ma. Sribhattojidikritaviracita Vaiyakaranasiddhantakaumudi Srivasudevadiksitakyta-Balamanorama-vyakhydsakita ... Pandila-Srigopalakastrinene-sampadita..., prathamo bhāgah, Varanasi 1958.
* Instead of the expression antahprajita, known from Mandukyopanişad 4 and 7, I would have rather expected antahsamjila- which seems to have been a Sámkhya term, attested in certain Puranic passages and the Manusmrti (1.49), among others; I intend to deal with it on another occasion.
» Reference is to the edition by Pt. Nandkishore Shastri (Shri Rajasthan Sanskrit College Granthamala No. 14) with Rare Commentaries. ..., Benares 1936.-In order to enable the reader to locate this and other quotations) in editions other than those used by me, I should like to mention here that the prakarara is, of course, that about the deitiyakaraka', in the Siddhantakaumudi and the texts depending on it directly or indirectly.
The edition from which I quote is: dgesabhaffaviraciták Brhacchabdendusekharah (dvitiyo bhagah), sampadakah Dä. Sristarâmasästri .... (Sarasvatibhavana-Granthamäla 87), Vårāṇast 1960.
. It may be noted here that Haridiksita, too, in his Bhacchabdaratna (p. 666. 14; as for the edition see fn. 31) considers it necessary to add to what is said in the Praudhamanoramd: sa(read: lat.) suamino od hims drastanya. • Reference is to K.P. Trivedi's edition, Part 1, (Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series No. 78), Poona 1925.
Brought into relief by Vitthala in his commentary on the Prakriya kaumudi by explaining: bhakrayaty amatyam iti: himsayality arthall. -Note that a similar phrase is found in the Varaparpini, a subcommentary on the Laghusabdendusekhara, where it is however only adduced as a secondary example; for what Guruprasáda Sastri says is (677. 32-33; cf. fn. 35): himsångeti himsa=duhkhajanako wydparah, arigamphalar yasyety arthah hisaphalake iti yavat / yatha 'manusyam bhakşayati' iti parah=krivaladih (cf. the passage of the LS$ quoted above in $2.5. 4, which is preceded by the statement: himstige bhaksane bhakser orttik, going back to Kaiyara (cf. 2. 1. above)]; see also fn. 67.
On this term cf. P. V. Kane, History of Dharmasastra, Vol. III, Poona 1973, pp. 245-248 as well as J.D.M. Derrett, Essays in Classical and Modern Hindu Law, Vol. I, Leiden 1976, p. 81 fn. 2 and Vol. IV, Leiden 1978, p. 399 f. As a separate "vyavaharapada' the saamipalavidda is mentioned c.g. in Manu 8.5 and, of course in later works like' e.g. Nilakartha's Vyanaharamayikha.
"O.C., Vol. III, pp. 497-501.
und ihr Verhältnis zueinander und zu Kautilya, Leipzig 1927, pp. 120-128.
i Bharuci's Commentary on the Manusmrti, (The Manu-SastraVivarana, Books 6-12) Text, Translation and Notes. Vol. 1: The Text, Vol. II: The Translation and Notes, Wiesbaden 1975. (The quotation is found there on p. 166 f.).
"I fail to understand why Derrett takes the locative pathi in the verse to be on a par with kette, whereas he renders the phrasc... kim pathi ketram andoytam...of the commentary by ... that the field alongside the path was unfenced'. In as much as all the commentators on this verse of Manu's and its parallels in other Dharmasastra texts as well as their translators etc. are, as far as I can see, unanimously of the opinion that 'a field that is near a
