________________
AUGUST, 1887.]
NOTES ON THE MAHABHASHYA.
249
tions, three in the Parasmaipada and three (Gaņa is also substituted before y, when in the Atmanêpada, and only three substi- IĘ commences with '). tutes, the rule P. I. 3, 10, which determines 14. Luptanirdishta."0_Occasionally a conthe order in which substitutions take place, sonant (usually or ) is supposed to have would not be applicable, and that Panini been elided in the text of the Sutras. Such therefore ought to have shown in some other consonant would of course have to be rewny, how the substitution should take place. placed, when explaining the text. On P. I. Such objection is met by the statement that 3, 7, Katyayana demands a special rule, to
TUT is an ékasésha-nirdosa, for th : + teach that, contrary to Panini's ralo, the art : i.e. ET E + T ; and the num- initial of the suffixes Tyg and 799 is swf ber of substitntes having thus been shown to an Anubandha. According to Patañjali, no be six, the order of substitution is after all such rule is required becanse the two snffixes regulated by P. I. 3, 10 (Vol I. p. 500). To really begin with the letter , which has been P. I. 1. 27 uittrar ATA Katyâyana elided in the text (Vol. I. p. 263). wishes to append the note that a etc., when 15. Dvi-karako nirdobah." - More often used as proper names, are not termed Sarva- Panini is supposed to have omployed a double námáns. Such a note, however, is by Patan- consonant, where the actual text of the Satras jali. regarded as superfluous, because ofera
has only a singlo consonant. On P. VIII. 3, 5, सर्वनामानि may be taken to stand for सर्वादीनि
uft Katyayana suggests that, bofore the erret para r4 .
etc., are etc., are
angment (in 4 + Fhai), (not) shoull (termed) Sarvanámáni; (and the) er etc., be substitutod for the final of (= hT). (here spoken of) are nouns denoting anybody' According to Patañjali, Katyayana's remark is (not proper names). (Vol. I. p. 88).
superfluous, bechase the substitution of has 13. Avibhaktiko nirdosah."-PAņini on been taught in Piņini's own rule, the wording rare occasions does put down in his Sutras of which really is a: Fafe (or ghof), i.r. 'ą certain terms without the case-terminations, is substituted for the final of) 4 boforo at which we should have expected him to attach (Vol. III. p. 425). Theoretically it is perfectly to them. Bat this will hardly be considered true that, by the rules of euphony, original to justify the commentators in assuming an
4: Fait might have been changuil to : avibhaktika nirdesa, the employment of a term
aft, but how little importance enn bo nttached withont termination,' in instances like the fol
to Patañjali's remark, may be seen from the lowing. The wording of P. VII. 3, 82 and fact that quite a different meaning has been 83 is fast , or, when the two rules assigned by him to the same rule समः स्मुहि in are joined according to the rules of euphony, Vol. III. p. 94.
fu. To meet certain objections, Pa- 16. Anvarthasarjaa."-Technical terms tañjali in Vol. I. p. 47 takes the first rule to
are employed for the sake of economy or breconsist of the three words faç T: TT, where l vity. When, then, Panini uses other than short he base try would stand for the Genitive case technical terms, he does so to show that the f: "Gana is substituted for the r of PAU): application of those terms accords with their and in Vol. III. p. 335 he further divides etymological meaning. On the role I. 1, 23, Torer into yy +ga, where the base in which Paņini teaches that , TT, eto. are y wonld stand for the Nominative case TT: termed Sankhya, Kityayana would wish it to
Patafijali in Vol. I. pp. 21 25, 47; Vol. II. p. 46; Vol. III. p. 257: (dvimao);-Vol. III. p. 351 (diwilu, Vol. III pp. 242, 385, 414.
trita"). This is perhaps the right placo for the remark | Compare e.g. P. III. 3, 17 a; III. 8,50 $; III. 3, 48 that the wrong readirge of the rule P. I. 1,5 FAVI. 1, 184 and VI. 4,6 7: VI. 8,62 TK; VI. 4,142 fa. ( fa ) owes its origin to Patanjali's suggestion in 0 Patanjali in Vol. I. pp. 49, 263 (twice); Vol. II.
Vol. I. p. 200 and Vol. II. p. 189, p. 52; Vol. III. pp. 43, 245, 257. The letters supposed to
Thura have been dropped are ,
fargāt. Compare , and once
similar expression in Vol. III. - Patañjali in Vol. I. p. 139; Vol. III. pp. 94, 254,
p. 110. 428 ; (dvisakdraks nirdalah);-Vol. I. p. 153 ; Vol. II. _* Patanjali in Vol. I. pp. 81, 89, 96, 235, 324, 316.379: p. 68 Vol. III. pp. 37, 158, 208; (dvila®):-Vol. I. Vol. II. pp. 3, 76. Compare anrarthag mhano in Vol. I p. 170; (dvija);-Vol. II. p. 30; (dricha)-Vol. III. pp. 88, 219, 227, 229, 237, 472; Vol. II. pp. 303, 416, pp. 48, 250; (dvida);-Vol. III. pp. 109, 410; (drina"); Vol. IIl. pp. 99, 120, 413.
