________________
AUGUST 1876.]
ON THE MAHABHASHYA.
247
which has been derived from them. Whether was the main object of his work. Moreover, the late Prof. Goldstücker was right in describ- so far from having attempted to bring forward ing the nature and the object of the Vårttikas anything in favour of the assertion that what as he has done, I may have occasion to examine we know of Patanjali's views has been compiled hereafter ; but allowing for the sake of argument from a more extensive work of that gramma that the Vårttikas contain nothing but criti- rian, Dr. Barnell appears rather inclined to cisms on PÂņini, and that it was the sole aim of regard the copiousness of the matter in the Katyayana 'to find fault' with that gramma- Mahabhashya as inconsistent with the idea of rian, it certainly appears to me that in the Maha- its being an original work. The long argubhashya those criticisms' have in every case ment as to the utility of grammar, which to Dr. been given as fully as conld be expected, that Barnell appears to be so much out of place in a they are supported by reasons whenever their refutation of Katyayana, fills in reality by far nature admits of or necessitates such support, the smaller number of the 27 pages of the inand that the term 'abridgment' is as little ap-1 troductory Ahnika : for as early as the 12th page plicable to them as it would be applicable to the we read the words सिद्धे शब्दार्थसंबन्धे, which, by the Sūtras of Påņini. As regards Patanjali, it has no- unanimous consent of all grammatical works il where been shown that he was bound to confine known to me, form the first of Katyayana's his remarks to a refutation of Katyayana, nor Värttikas. I too am inclined to believe has it been proved that the justification of Påņini that the reasonsT in favour of the study of
& A few examples must suffice here. On P. I. 1. 1 the and fivarinanda's Bhashyapradipavivarana • two first várttikas are:
वाररुचं वार्निकम् । तद्धि मंगलाचरणपूर्वकं सिद्धे शब्दार्थेत्यादि। (a) संज्ञाधिकारः संज्ञासंप्रत्ययार्थः।।
The varttikas commented on- by Patanjali in the first (8) इतरथा घसंप्रत्ययो यथा लोके ।।
Ahnika are the following :Here the reason for which Katyayana demands a Sam- सिद्धे शब्दार्थसंबन्धे। jn dhikara is given in T44984, and the fault which लोकतो ऽर्थप्रयुके शब्दप्रयोगे शामेण धर्मनियमः। is said to arise from the non-adoption of such an adhi. यथा लौकिकवैदिकेषु ।। kára is stated in varttika (b). It is unnecessary to state
अस्त्यप्रयुक्त इति चेत्रार्थे शब्दप्रयोगात् । here how Katydyana himself subsequently shows that in reality no Samjnádhikára is required.
अप्रयोगः प्रयोगान्यत्वात् । On P. I. 1.4 we read the varttika (a) यग्य कचबलोपे अपयुके दीर्घसत्त्रवत्। प्रतिषेधः, the reason for the adoption of which is stated
सर्वे देशान्तरे ॥ in (b) नुम्लोपत्रिन्यनुबन्धलोपेऽप्रतिषेधार्थम्।
ज्ञाने धर्म इति चेत्तथाधर्मः। On P. I. 1. 5 the varttika (a) कृिति प्रतिषेधे तत्रिमित्त- आधारे नियमः। ग्रहणम्, the reason for which is stated in (७) उपधारोरवी- प्रयोगे सर्वलोकस्य। त्यर्थम् ।
शासपूर्वके प्रयोगे ऽभ्युदयस्तनुल्यं वेदशन्देन ।। On P. I.1.9 the varttika सवर्णसंज्ञायां भिनदेशपतिप्रसङ्ग. सूत्रे व्याकरणे षष्ठ्यर्थों ऽनुपपत्रः। प्रयत्नसामान्यात, where the resson for the objection mised
शब्दापतिपत्तिः। is given in the last word.
शन्दे ल्युडर्थः। On P. I. 1. 13 in the varttika मात्मगधसंज्ञायां तस्या
भवे । । सिद्धत्वादयावेकादेशप्रतिषेधः the reason is given in the पोकादयब तरिताः। words तस्यासिद्धत्वात्..
लक्ष्यलक्षणे व्याकरणम् ॥ OnP. I. 1. 20 in the varttika घुसंज्ञायां प्रकृतिग्रहणं
वृत्तिसमवायार्थ उपदेशः। शिदथे the reason for the correction in stated in the
अनुबन्धकरणार्थश्च । word शिदर्थम्.
इष्टबुचर्थवेति चेदुदात्तानुदानस्वरितानुनासिकरीर्घ तानाSee also the varttikas on P. I. 1. 23:-- (a) संख्यासंज्ञायां संख्याग्रहणम्।।
मप्युपदेशः।
आकृत्युपदेशासिद्धमिति चेत्संवृतादीनां प्रतिषेधः ॥ (6) संख्यासंप्रत्ययार्थम् ॥
The so-called Varttika.patha, of which I possess a MS., (0) इतरथा घसंप्रत्ययोऽकृत्रिमत्वायथा लोके।।
appears to me to be a modern compilation, and does not (d) उत्तरार्थं च ॥
decide the question of what are vdrttikas and what not. || I need quote only Vakyapadiya, I. 23 :
पारकोहागमलघ्वसंदेहाः प्रयोजनम्, and तेऽसुराः up to सुदंनित्याः शब्दार्थसंबन्धास्तत्राबाता महर्षिभिः ।
वोऽसि वरुण. That Patanjali his not himself collected सूत्राणां सानुतन्त्राणां भाष्याणां च प्रणेतृभिः॥
the passages S T , &c. appears to follow from the fact on which the commentator remarks:
that he understands the eighth of them, चत्वारि, to indicate अनुतन्त्रं वार्तिकम् । तत्राप्यु सिद्धे शब्दार्थसंबन्ध इति ॥ I Rigveda, IV. 58. 3, while at the same time he informs us.
