________________
SEPTEMBEE, 1903.)
BOOK-NOTICE.
379
BOOK-NOTICE. CANDRA-TYĀKARANA: DIE GRAMMATIK DES CANDRA Chandra's grammar. These and several
GOMIN. SUTRA, UNĀDI, DXĀTUPĀTEA. Edited by subsidiary texts and commentaries, comprising DR. BRUNO LI BICH, Brookhaus. Leipzig, 1902.
altogether twenty works (briefly described in the The foundations of the scientific study of the Indian Antiquary for 1896, pp. 103-5), are all native system of Sanskrit grammar having been preserved in the Tibetan translations made belaid by Böhtlingk in his two editions of Panini tween 700 and 900 A. D., and contained in the and by Kielhorn in his monumental edition of the Tanjur. These accurate translations are of the Mahabháshya, the parampard of researches in utmost value to the editors of the corresponding this field is being worthily continued by the latter Sanskrit texts. scholar's pupil, Prof. Liebich, of the University! The main part of Prof. Liebich's edition of Breslau, himself long well-known by his consists of the 8tra of the grammar itself writings on Paniai and the Katika Vritti. He l (pp. 1-139). This is preceded by the Dhatupdtha has in the volume now before us produced (pp. 1-34°), to which is added a transliterated a valuable critical edition of the most important list of the roots in alphabetical order parts of the system of the Buddbist Sanskrit (pp. 35° -47). Judging by the pagination, this grammarian Chandragômin. This grammar, part of the volume was added after the rest bad though not belonging to the Påninean system, been printed. The third part is formed by the is yet of historical value in connexion with that Unddi-Satra (pp. 140-171), to wbich is appended system, since Batras of Chandra which have no & transliterated alphabetical list of the Unidi parallel in Påņini and Patanjali, are borrowod, in words (pp. 172.181). The volume concludes with a modified or unmodified form, by the authors an index to the grammatical and the Unådi Satras of the Kibika Vritti, but always without any combined (pp. 182-235). There is a short preface acknowledgment of the source (e. 9., Chandra of four pages dealing chiefly with the MS. Sútra III, ii, 61 in K. V. IV, ii, 138 and material used by the editor. A long introduction IV, iv, 72-73 in K. V. v, iv, 75). Hence was unnecessary after the author's extensive Prof. Liebich's edition of Chandragðmin is article on the Chandra-vydkarana in the Göttinger a necessary preliminary step towards the elucida- Nachrichten for 1895 (pp. 272-321), and his tion of several passages in the present text of the contribution to the Vienna Oriental Journal for Kalika. Sanskritists will look forward to the 1899 on the date of Chandragomin (pp. 306-315). critical edition of the latter commentary which His chronological argument, in the latter article, Prof. Liebich intends to bring out later on. is based on a bappy and convincing conjectural The expectation that MSS. of Chandragomin's
emendation of a sentence occurring in his MS. of
the Chandra-vritti, a commentary on the Chandragrammar might turn up in a Buddhist country like Ceylon, has never been fulfilled. But the
sitra, which he believes Chandragomin himself
to have composed, though he reserves the proof work was at one time undoubtedly known there; for an elementary Sanskrit grammar entitled
of this belief for a future occasion. The sentence Blivabodhana, which is an abstract of Chandra
in question, ajayad Gupt8 Húndn iti, is employed written about 1200 A. D. by a Buddhist monk in
as an illustration of the use of the imperfect to Ceylon, bas been preserved (published at Colombo
express that an event occurred within the lifetime
of the speaker. Now the event here spoken of in 1895).
can only refer to the temporary defeat of the • In Kashmir, which was probably the native Hanas by Skandagupta soon after 465 A. D., or country of Chandragomin, nothing beyond a single to their final expulsion, in the year 544 A.D., leaf containing the varnd-sitras, or phonology, by Yasodharman. The author of the Chandra. and the paribhdshd-dras, or rules of interpreta-l veitti must therefore have flourished either tion, belonging to this grammarian's system, has
about 480 or 550 A. D., the former date been brougat to igno. This Iragment, thouga so being the more probable according to Prof. small in extent, has, however, proved of critical
Liebich's showing. Even if the foregoing arguvalue in connexion with the texts subsequently ment were to be set aside, the date of Chandradiscovered.
gồmin's grammar could not be later than 600 On the other hand, Nepal, that small country
A. D., as it was known to the authors of the to which we owe the preservation of so many
Katika Vritti. works of Buddhistio Sanskrit literature, has The grammatical Satras, which number about yielded, after persistent search, M88. of all 3,100, are printed separately, each line containing the most important trestises connected with but one Satra together with the reference to the
