Indian Antiquary Vol 48

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 150

146
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
Persian (Early History of India, 3rd edition, p. 133n.). According to this interpretation the Yavana Dhammadeva, the Saka Ushavadata and the Kushap Vasudeva must have been all native Hindus of India. If Greeks and other foreigners adopted Hindu names there is no wonder that some of them assumed Iranic ones. There is, then, no good ground for thinking that Tushaspha was not a Greek but a Persian.
Tushispha is called 'Yavanaraja' and not rashtriya'. This probably indicates that he was not a salaried official, but a vassal king under the Mauryas. We learn from several edicts of Asoka (Rock edicts V and XIII) that there was actually
BOOK-NOTICE.
BHASHAVRITTI: published by BIMALACHARAN MAITRA, B.L., Asst. Secretary, The Varendra Research Society, Rajshahi, Bengal. 1918. Pg. ii+21614+ii. Price Rs. 6
The Bhashav ritti is a commentary on Panini's grammatical aphorisms excepting those that are exclusively Vedic. The book has been edited for the first time by Professor Srishchandra Chakravartti, B.A., of the Rajshahi College. We cull out a few observations about the author Purushottamadeva from the Introduction. According to Srishtidhara Chakravartti who wrote a commentary on the Bhashav itti about A.D. 1650, Purushottama "prepared the Bhashavṛitti at the bidding of the king Lakshman Sen" of Bengal. Thus the Bhashȧvritti seems to have been written in the 12th century of he Christian era. "Purushottamadeva was most ikely a Bengali... In his exposition of the pratyahara sairas, he says पुनर्ब. Now and वश् बश् are different in meanng and sound.... It is only with the Bengalis that and are identical in form and pronunciation.... Unless Purushottama was a Bengali why should he remark
"
Again such passages in the Bhashdvritti as qu नयां मतुप् (६।३।११०) and लेखको नास्तिदोषकः RIRIRY)" may support this hypothesis of his being a Bengali, for qurt is apparently the
eat stream Padda (written in Bengali Padma) on which the Sara bridge stands, and "t mitan: was a very familiar apology with the
[AUGUST, 1919
a Yona or Yavana principality subject to the suzerainty of the Maurya Emperor. The exact situation of this principality has not yet been determined. But it is constantly associated with Kamboja and Gandhara in inscriptions as well as in literature, and the Mahavansa (Maharasa, p. 229, Turnour's translation, p. 110) says that it contained the city of Alasanda or Alexandria. Both these requirements, viz., association with Kamboja and Gandhara, and the possession of the city of Alexandria, are satisfied by the country of Poclais or Pushkalavati (the modem Charsada on the Suwat River) "in which is Bucephalus Alexandria" (Schoff's Periplus, pp. 41, 183-4).
HEMCHANDRA RAYCHAUDHURI.
cld Bengali copyists of MSS." His example may also be cited in support.
The Bhashavritti explains the aphorisms of Panini in their original natural order,like the Katika. It does not tear away the aphorisms from their context, like the later works, Frakriyakaumudi, Siddhântakaumudi, Madhyakaumudi and Laghulmudt. So it is easily understandable. It is short. It is a work of undoubted authority, as is evidenced by the fact that it was quoted by Sripatidatta, Saranadeva (these two in their turn are quoted by Bhattoji Dikshita), Bhattoji and Gopinatha. The book has been carefully edited and excellently printed. References to other sûtras of Panini occurring in the gloss on any particular sutra have been inserted, which will greatly simplify the work of the reader. The editor's notes are accurate and well-chosen. They show a minute and extensive acquaintance with the literature on the subject. Is it too much to expect that such a book would find a place in the curriculam of the Indian Universities?
It has been said that the text has been carefully. edited. I give only two examples below. The aphorism T: (3-2-139) appears
as ग्लाजिस्थश्च ग्मुः (.., ग् instead of कू) in most printed books, e.g. in the SiddhantaBhanuji's and Kshiraav&min's commentary on the kaumudi with Tattvabodhini, Bombay, 1915; in Amarakosa; in the commentary of Mallinatha on Bhatti, I, 25, II, 32, 47, Bombay Sanskrit Series; in Principal S. Ray's, J. N. Kaviratna's and Durgaprasad Sivadatta's editions of Situpalavadha; in Professor Devendrakumar Banerji's and M. R