________________
JUNE, 1894.]
exactness the meaning of every explanation, given in the Dhâtupâțha. Bhatti's version of the Ramayana, which has been composed between Guptasamvat 252 and 330 and probably dates from the reign of Dharasena III. of Valabhi about G. S. 310, illustrates most of them, and Halayudha's Kavirahasya,3 written during the reign of one of the Krishnarajas of the Râshtra. kuța line, between A. D. 775 and A. D. 973, shows the meaning and conjugation of every root. If further help is wanted, there are considerable fragments of Bhima's or Bhauma's Râvanârjunira, which Kshemendra, saec. XI, quotes as an instance of a kistrakávya or kávyaśástra.
4
THE ROOTS OF THE DHATUPATHA.
143
air
As far as my own, of a necessity desultory and incomplete, studies in Hindu grammar permit me to judge, the result of the whole enquiry will be, that the Dhâtupâtha of the "wondrous three " did not differ materially from that commented by Sayana. And it is not doubtful to me that verifications for a certain number of verbs and inflexions will be found in the Bhashya, and other grammatical works. It seems to me impossible to contemptuously leave aside such sentences as at a fra Varttika 3 on P. III. 1, 78 (Kielhorn, M. Bl. II. 61), or ibidem Vârttika 2, fra (M. Bh. II. 56), or such specific forms as न्यग्लुचत् । न्यग्लोचीत् । ibidem, and अवदिग्ये (M. Bh. III. 346) 0 The fact that a preposition is prefixed to the last three forms indicates that Patanjali had in his mind a particular passage or phrase, in which they occurred. The four sentences are quotations, as insuspicious as the famous वरतनु संप्रवदन्ति कुकुटाः, पञ्च पञ्चनखा भक्ष्या and so forth. I must add that, if I were as much racked by doubts regarding the history of the Dhâtupâtha, as Professor Whitney appears to have been, I should not lose a moment, before I began to search, or had searched by others every work, bearing on the question. Together with his staff of able pupils Professor Whitney no doubt could have effected all that is necessary and laid his fellow-students under new obligations by bringing out a work, giving a clear and comprehensive view of the state of the list of roots before and after beginning of our era.
Turning to Professor Whitney's grievance against the Hindu grammarians, his assertion that they have inserted "false," "sham," or "fictitious" forms in the list of verbs, which, as is acknowledged at all hands, has an intimate connection with their Sabdânusâsana, is supported in his present paper by the sole argument that he cannot find the verbs, their inflexions and meanings in the literature accessible to him. In his earlier article (Am. Journ. Phil. Vol. V.) he refers to Professor Edgron's paper on the Verbal Roots of the Sanskrit Language (Journ. Am. Or Soc. Vol. XI. p. 1-55). He greatly approves of his pupil's results and appears to wish them to be taken together with his own argument. Professor Edgren's views coincide with those of sundry authorities in comparative philology, while they disagree from those of the most competent Sanskritists of the last generation.
Briefly stated, Professor Edgren's line of argument is as follows: (1) The Dhâtupátha contains a great many more roots that cannot be found, than such as are traceable in Sanskrit literature, and the same remark holds good with respect to the inflexions and meanings of the roots. And in spite of a "vast" progress in the exploration of Vedic and Sanskrit works, the proportion of the former had remained in 1882 virtually the same as in 1841, when Professor Westergaard expressed the conviction that every form in the Dhâtupâtha is genuine and would be found some time or other in inaccessible or unexplored works. Professor Edgren's second proposition is certainly not in accordance with the facts, as will be shewn below.
(2) The roots, preserved in the grammars and their Angas alone, are barren and mostly have no offspring, are not connected with derivative nouns, such as the genuine roots have
See Professor Bhandarkar's Report, 1883-4, p. 8f. The poem is a Sastrakarya in the guise of a Prasasti, addressed directly to the poet's patron, king Krishna.
4 Kasmir Report, p. 62f. and Professor Peterson, First Report, p. 8 f.
5 Professor Whitney omits T in para. 731 of his Grammar. Professor Westergaard mentions that occurs in the Bhashya.
2 is according to the Kasika the perfect of and stands for . For a dental, followed by ya, a gutteral is substituted also in nikyam instead of nityam, Asoka, Rock Edict XIV. (Kalst), and there are other instances of the same change in the Indian Vernaculars.
