________________
OCTOBER, 1913.)
THE PRIORITY OF BHAMAHA TO DANDIN
259
The verses in Bhâmaha's Kávydlaskára in which Nyasakâra is alluded to are as under:
शिष्टप्रयोगमावेष न्यासकारमतेन वा। तृचा समस्वपष्ठीकं न कयंचिदुवाहरेत् ॥ सूत्रज्ञापकमात्रेण वृत्रहन्ता यथोदितः। .
भकेन च न कुर्वीत वृत्ति तगमको षथा । The passage from Jinondrabaddhi's Kafikávitaranapañjiká, as quoted by Prof. Pathak, is as ander :
अथ किमयं नृचः सानुबन्धस्योचारणम् । तृनो निवृत्यर्थम् । नैतदस्ति । तयोगे न लोकाव्ययेत्यादिना षष्ठीप्रतिषेधान् | एवं तातदेव ज्ञापकं भवति तयोगेऽपि कचित् षष्ठी भवतीति । तेन भीष्मः कुरूणां भयशोकहन्तेस्वेवमादि सिद्धं भवति ।।
Now what Bhâmaha arges is that Pâņini's sútra arzi aast'RI 1 3411 should be strictly observed and no weta y compound formed with words ending in the subjective and भक suffixes. Consequently no compound takes place in instances like अपां स्रष्टा, वत्रस्य भर्ता, and
E TT : How then, says Bhattoji Dikshita, is a compound like Prat : in qerai fafan u m : to be accounted for? He then gives Kaiyaţa's view 9989: HET
'. It will thus be seen that a compound of Cwt with a word ending in a or in the subjective sense is forbidden and that whenever & compound of a word in the genitive case is formed with a word ending in subjective or so as in I I I : it should be taken as a compound of Tyst with a For T word.
Let us now see what the extract given above from the Kasike drivara napanjika means. Nya sakara discusses the propriety of the anubandha in in the stra t ezi wafe.' His extract, as I understand it, means, as under :- Why does Pâņini pronounce with its anubat dha ? In other words, why does Påņini not give the satra as T&T aft'? W at is the propriety of the anubandha ? Nyåsakûra says that is pronounced to exclude it. That is to say, a compound of gt with a H is forbidden, not with a gw . But this view brings in another difficulty ; for the use of the genitive is forbidden with a war word by q a raनिष्ठाखलर्थतनाम्'२३६९|| and so षष्ठीसमास withaसन्त is out of the question. This difficulty is obviatel by Nyasakâra by sapposing that this very sútra is a that the genitive niay some. times be used with a Two word and that the Aly or prohibition of the genitive with a word by the sútra maT is facut or inconstant. The probibition of the genitive with a word being inconstant, the prayoga fisk:
2016RIT etc. according to the extract as given by Prof. Pathak or the compounds h ar etc., can be justified.
In brief, the gist of the Nya sakâra's contention is this. No compound of the genitive with वजन्त word can take place according to Panini's बजकाभ्यां कर्तरि. Therefore compounds of the genitive with a word ending in a should be justified by taking the word ending in to be a
Now let us see what Bbîmaha means and whether the Nyâsakara alluded to ly bin is Jinen. drabuddbi. He urges very strongly that Pâņini must be strictly followed and that compounds of the genitive with a word ending in at should on po account be formed either on the strength of freig, 1. e., the use of such compounds by the learked, or on the strength of the view of the Nyasakâra, as the compound ERT las actnally been mentioned simply on the strength of सूत्रज्ञापक. कथंचित् seems to have been explained by Bhamaha by सूत्रज्ञापकमात्रण. Some justify compounds of the genitive with a word ending in ay by Půyini's own fata in the sátra wa wala. The sense of Blåmaha's words is qaite clear. He contends that Pâņini must be followed and no compound of the genitive with a 19 word should ever be formed; Nyasakâra's opinion should on no account be accepted and water
