________________
594
or body of works would probably have been provided. Nor does the first possibility agree with the general and primary sense of agama (traditionally handed down knowledge' as explained in Aklujkar 1971:169-70).
3.3 Thus, if we are to follow the indications that 485 and 486 give, the initial achievement of Candracārya and others can be narrowed down to (a) culling of the vyākaraṇāgama bearing on the Mahābhāṣya from various works preserved in the South and (b) interpretation of the works surviving in the South that contained information crucial to a proper understanding of the Mahābhāṣya which had ceased to be properly studied. Now, these two activities are mutually complementary in practice. Mere collection of relevant passages or works is useless without interpretation, and no satisfactory interpretation of texts which have gone out of currency is possible unless passages of similar . or related import are put near each other. Therefore, what Candrācārya and his associates or successors did was probably both collation and exegesis.
THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN
3.4 I thus understand recovery of as much vyakaraṇāgama as was available in a book-bound, moribund form to be the nature of the activity referred to by āgamam labdhvā. I do not think that the agama referred to in this phrase is different from the vyākaraṇāgama mentioned in 485 or is one, specific, work. I view Candrācārya and others as having in their possession the Mahābhāṣyale and some other texts of the Pāṇinian
16 Attempts have been made, most notably by Albrecht Weber and S. D. Joshi, to infer from verses 481-90 that the text of
