Jain Journal 1998 10

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

Page 37

68
JAIN JOURNAL: Vol-XXXIII, No. 2 October 1998
Then Sāyaṇācārya has given the etymology of these words like ile, agni etc.
The root iḍ takes cerebral in between two vowels and he has quoted an authority for that. Sāyaṇācārya says that d>laccording to Bahuṛca people. In the case of etymology of agni Sāyaṇa has given two or three interpretations all supported by authoritative texts like Nirukta. While giving the various meanings of agni connected with its derivation, he has always quoted lines from Aitareya-brāhmaṇa, Taittiriya-brāhmaṇa and Taittiriya-samhita and so on for the justification of that etymological meaning.
And lastly for the accent he has also qu ted from Panini for giving reasons for udatta, anudatta and svarita accent.
Though the first mantra is very exhaustive and a very detailed analysis is given at every point, Sāyaṇācārya at the end of the first ṛk has humbly said that he has done this explanation briefly
vedāvatāra ādyāyā ṛco'rthasca prapancitaḥ/
vijñātam veda-gāmbhiryam atha samkṣipya varṇyate//
One thing is to be noted that as far as we know Sāyaṇācārya has seldom quoted any lines from the Upanisads. He has interpreted the Vedic texts from the point of view of karmakāṇḍa and for that reason he has quoted from the Śrauta-sūtras, but as Upaniṣad belongs to jñānakāṇḍa he has naturally not quoted from them. There could be another reason as well, Upanisad developed nearly thousand years later than the Samhita texts and has developed very independently without any reference to Karmakāṇḍa. The sacrificial texts (Śrautasūtras) also developed very late, but as they contain mainly the sacrificial process and, therefore, have quoted lines from the Samhita texts, these are regarded as important texts for interpreting the Vedic sacrifices. And naturally Sāyaṇācārya will resort to these texts for Vedic sacrifices. These texts have also some foundations on Brahmaṇa literature, where also some aspects of sacrificial things are found.
Taking all these facts into consideration, it can be said, though in modern times there are many elements known as methodology for writing a dissertation, the basic principles of methodology were also followed by Indian commentators while interpreting their respective texts.
After Sāyaṇācārya, the commentator worth mentioning is Mallinatha (14th cent. A.D.) who has commented upon almost all the important Mahākāvyas in order to restore the better meaning of works