Cattle Field And Barley Note On Mahabhasya

Author(s): A Wezler
Publisher: A Wezler

Page 8

438
THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN
found an explicit statement about Kaiyaṭa's own preference. But since one of them contains a statement which can at least be taken as indicative in this respect and since the author of another is quite outspoken, though on his own part and with reference to the Bh. alone, it will not be out of place to take notice of them in in toto. 2. 4.
Annambhaṭṭa in his
Mahābhāṣyapradipoddyotana remarks (IV. 325. 11- 13) 20: acetanānām yavānām katham himsā, ata āha-kṣetrasthānām iti/caitanyānabhyupagantṛmate. 'py aha-parakiyeti | himsänge himsärthasyety atrarthaśabdaḥ prayojanavāci | himsaprayojanakabhinnar the vartamānasyeti vivakṣitam iti bhavaḥ . '[Kaiyaṭa] says On account of the fact...because [one might ask] how nonsentient barley [plants could] be injured. By Or else if it is the barley belonging to somebody else...he explains [the examples] also with regard to the opinion of those who do not accept that [plants] are sentient [beings]:... The manner in which Annambhaṭṭa expresses himself in the second sentence is such that one is given the impression that he took the first alternative to represent Kaiyaṭa's own true conviction to which the other alternative was only added in order to offer a plausible explanation for those, too, who do not share his opinion and that there were in fact such people he thought he could hardly ignore.
Nageśa, on the other hand, gives the following explanation in his Uddyota (II 275 a 29-36): pindyā aprāṇitvad udaharane bhakṣer ahimsarthatvam || nanu yavānām apy acetanatvāt tadviṣayasyapi katham himsārthatvam ata āha