________________
22
ABORI: Diamond Jubilee Volume
cerned about is the possibility of plagiarism. He does not wish that anyone (probably, from among his contemporaries) should expropriate his thought - his findings. Therefore, he seeks to deter prospective plagiarists by writing the stern words: "He who prepares a pratikañcuka (work having the same contents) in the case of this (Aryabhaṭiya) causes perdition of [his] good deeds and life ".30 As for the Vakya-kāṇḍa passage with which we are immediately concerned here, the suitability of the sense of pratikañcuka gathered from the Tantra-värttika is even easier to see. The Mahabhaṣya, as a recast or adaptation of the Samgraha, made use of the contents of the Samgraha (see footnote 28 above). Hence it has been described as samgraha-pratikañcuka. Thus, Kielhorn showed a remarkable sensitivity to the drift of 481-490 when he suggested that 484d be translated as "preserving the (contents of the) Samgraha " 31
5.5 How did pratikañcuka acquire this figurative sense of old wine in a new bottle'? I think pratikañcuka is a compound of the type of pratikṛti replica', praticchāyā reflection, mirror-image', pratinidhi 'substitute, representative', pratibimba reflection, mirror-image', and pratirūpa 'counterpart'. The prati in it carries the sense another similar, the one on that side which agrees with what we have on this side'. In other words, there is an implication in it of bodily difference (physical distinctness) as well as of inner or substantial correspondence. Its remaining constituent, kañcuka, is most probably intended in the commonly noticed meaning cloak, robe'. Thus, the etymological meaning of pratikañcuka seems to me to have been another dress, another garb, disguise', the implication being that the substance is the same in spite of the change in appearance. I think that the figurative sense given above emerges naturally when this etymological sense is restricted to the context of literature-to the context of composing works or passages.
30. This interpretation requires a repetition of kurute. However, the repetition is not as strained as in the case of Thieme's interpretation, for kurute is placed in the verse between pranasam and pratikañcukam with which it is connected. There is also the possibility that the original wording of the Aryabhatiya line was sukṛtayusoḥ pranašaṁ kurute kurute pratikañcukam yo 'sya, and that one kurute has been lost through haplography. The äryä metre is not disturbed in either reading.
31. Since it involved a major change in the reading furnished by all accessible manuscripts, I did not give the benefit of the following possibility to the author of the Tika in writing 5. 2. It is possible that his remark introducing 484 (see footnote 27 above) is a result of corruption through haplography-that it was intended to be read as: tatha ca samgraha[-samkṣepa-bhutamh] pratipaksa-bhatair acaryais tarka-vidyamatra-vedibhih See the Tika passage quoted in footnote 28 above. If my guess is correct, the meaning pratipaksa or pratipakṣa-bhūta assigned to the word pratikañcuka by the compilers of dictionaries on the authority of the Tika must be said to be the result of an unfortunate error.
