Jain Journal 1998 10

Author(s): Jain Bhawan Publication
Publisher: Jain Bhawan Publication

Page 34

BANERJEE : RESEARCH IN SANSKRIT AND JAINA LITERATURE
65
Sanskrit. Their methodology may differ from the present time, but basically the problem is the same. The simple method is whatever subject-matter is to be stated, the interpretation must be logical, so that it can be accepted by all. In doing so some references are to be given in order to substantiate the author's case. And in this case authoritative books are cited as it is in modern times. These citations of books can be regarded as a sort of bibliography though not given in the form as it is given in modern times.
4. Methodology in the age of commentary
In the second stage the method of interpretation was slightly changed. It is the stage of commentary. In this commentary stage every commentator or rather interpreter of the Sastras has stated first in their introductory verses how and in what way the respective texts are to be interpreted. To this class of thinkers belong Sāyaṇācārya for interpreting the Vedic texts, Mallinātha for interpreting the works of Kalidasa, Nilakantha for the Mahābhārata, Tilakaṭikā of the Rāmāyaṇa and many others. It is not possible to indicate the methods of all these commentators in this short space and time.
In general, the commentators have normally followed the same methods in interpreting or explaining the texts. There is a couplet which indicates how the ancient people thought of interpreting a text. The verse is
pada-cchedah padarthoktir vigraho vākya-yojanā/
aksepo’tha samādhānam uyākhyānām sadvidham matam//
"Interpretation is considered to be concerned with the following six points: viz. the separation of the words, the rendering the meaning of the words, the analysis of the words formed by means of affixes or by composition, the construction of the sentences, the raising of objections, and afterwards the removal of them (Kielhorn)."
This indicates how the ancient people looked at the problem and wanted to solve it by following certain principles which are nothing but the methodology in the modern sense of the term.
In a similar way, Abhinavagupta (11th/12th cent. A.D.) in his Abhinavabhārati, a commentary on the Natyaśāstra, has stated at the very beginning of his commentary the following lines:
upadeyasya sampaṭhas tad anyasya pratikanam/ sphuṭa-vākyā virodhānām parihāraḥ supūrṇatā// lakṣyānusaranam slista-vyakta-vyāmsa-vivecanam/ samgatih paunaruktyānām samādhānam anakulam// samgrahaścetyayam vyākhyā prakāro'tra samāśritaḥ//