________________
JUNE, 1887.]
NOTES ON THE MAHABHASHYA.
183
P. VI. 1, 124 Pran, and 125 y Vol. I. p. 87, lines 17 and 18, and Vol. IIL. AT sfer. Patañjali's reading of these two rules p. 48. was 1247, and 125 ar sa parcury P. VII. 3, 75 185 1984 (such is the read. (Vol. III. p. 87, 1. 24); but on p. 89, 1. 18 he ing of the MSS. of the Kdóiká] fura originally declares the word facut to be altogether su- was ष्ठिवुकमुच्चमां शिति. The alteration of the perfluous, and in Vol. I. p. 66 and Vol. wording of the rule has been suggested by III. p. 53 he cites the rule 125 without fear. Kåtgåyana (Vol. III. p. 334). In Vol. III. p. 333. Kaiyata (on Vol. III. p. 87, 1. 24) has the note- 1. 15, where the rule is quoted, the best MSS. इन्द्रचेति ये मूर्व पठन्ति प्रतप्रगृह्या अचि नित्यमिति of the Mahabhashya give the altered form तु द्वितीयं तन्मतेनैष प्रमः.
of it, which has been adopted also by ChandraP. VI. 1, 137 : at rt, and 138 Kaiyata has the note- T A foraifa # 4. In the place of these two rules Pa- TOTTE...rargar HAF TU
A tañjali has had only the one rule of T r aiteurs afara dar fra :. TH t: t, which is so quoted in Vol P. VII. 3, 77 kg fent : originally was III. p. 216, 1. 1, and the first word eftaui t , as may be inferred from Katyaof which has been explained by Patañjali in yana's Vårttika on the rule (Vol. III. p. 334)Vol. III. p. 93, I. 13. (Compare the similar r is the reading also of Chandra. The Kasika explanation of ear in P. VII. 1, 68, in Vol. has the remark- hafa fua asoft III. p. 262, 1. 21.)
सयन्ति, and Kaiyata appends the note-घुगमीति P. VI, 1, 150 for : retarafat at ori- पाठोऽनार्ष इत्याहेषेश्छस्वमहलीति. ginally was विष्किरः शकुनी वा, a wording of the P. VIII. 4, 28 ayar originally was rule which was not approved of by Kåtyayana TETT HITTT:, as may be seen from Patañjali's (Vol. III. p. 95). In his opinion, P : remarks on the rule. The reading 34 , T would mean, that after takes has been suggested by Patañjali (Vol. III. p. the augment ac-optionally, when one wishes 460). to denoto a bird,' whereas the real meaning of the rule is assumed to be that after fra may
4. Whole rules added to the original take ax in case one wishes to denote a bird' ;
text of the Ashtadhyayi. in other words, the bird may be called for or P. IV. 1, 166 g
h is really a Pafcant, while in the case of any other meaning Vårttika of Kâtyâyana's on IV. 1, 163, and P. the only right form would be pafenc. (Differ. IV. 1, 167 CETTE is based on the Vårt. ently Goldstücker, Pánini, p. 125). Of the
tika s
a fate on IV. 1, 162 (Vol. II. commentators, Kaiyata has the note-pact: p. 265). As regards, however, the explanation Tratara 45 Area A, Haradatta of the two roles in the Mahabhåshya and in -TUTT TT Prat:
T
a ra | the Kasika, there is the difference, that in the and Nagôjibhatta-Forfattepfarrfattere former they are considered obligatory, while 973 far .
in the latter, by supplying from IV.1, 165, P. VI. 4, 56 ruft m it originally was they are made optional. Owing to the emFare myter. The substitution of the Abla- ployment of the Genitive cases वृद्धस्य and यूनः, tive for the Genitive case has been suggested neither rule fits into the text of Påņini's Ashby Katyayana (Vol. III. p. 204). In the Maha- tadhydy. On Kâtyâyana's Värttikas Kaiyata bhashya the rule has been quoted in its original | has the remarks-सूवेषु तु कैश्चितजस्वच पूजावामिति form in Vol. III. p 288, lines 4 and 11, and
are fer, and Ferrafa - in its altered form p. 191, I. 12, and p. 212, T art TT. lines 1 and 14. Kaiyata has the remark
P.IV.2,
8 08 is really part of Kátyâyana's rurit rufe yerere alargar Vårttiks on the preceding rule IV.2, 7 (Vol. II. लघुपूवादिति पञ्चम्यन्तम्.
p. 273). P. VII. 1, 25 Turf: Ty originally P. IV. 3, 132 uurft and 133 was अब डतरादिभ्यः पञ्चभ्य. The addition to अद| भाथर्वणिकस्येकलीपश्च are really two Virttikas of the Anubandha has been suggested by of Katyâyana, which in the Mahâbhåshya are Kâtyâyana (Vol. III. p. 250). Compare also placed under P. IV.3, 131 (Vol. II. p. 320).
