Madhuvidya

Author(s): S D Laddu, T N Dharmadhikari, Madhvi Kolhatkar, Pratibha Pingle
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 663

BOOK REVIEWS
175
Nirukta 7.10. But this section of the Nirukta does not list sacrifice in general among the shares (hhakti) of Indra. In the note 53.3 on p. 31 of App. A, it would have been better to add that the Nighantu (1.12 ) itself does not list rajah among the synonyms of water.
In the note 61-8 given in App. A. p. 24 one could have also referred to H. Lüders : Das Würfelspiel im alten Indien, Phil. Indica p. 106 ff. On p. 61 lines 10-11 of the commentary occurs the word tālpāh as qualifying räjaputrah. Here the editors might have referred to the Sat. Br. 13.1.6.2 where we get the word tàlpya qualifying rāja putra (saram var rálpyā rājaputrā āśāpālāh). The commentator explains the word talpya as talpasādhavas talpyah sayyāgarāh talpena saman rātrau ye sādhu raksanti. On p. 107, line 13 Dārila explains the sūtra word äkarsa as ākarşah lohakaranam | angārākarsanārthani kuțakaḥ. One may note in passing that the commentary Tattvabodhini explains akarsa as ākrsyate' nena khalādigatam dhānyani ity akarsaḥ (while commenting on the example äkarşaśvaḥ given under P. 5.4-97)
On p. 123 of the text, in line l occurs the expression amusyäḥ putrasya as two different words. It is also given as two words in the Padapatha of AV 10.5.36. In App. B (p. 49 ) the editors offer the following comment : “But according to P. 5.1.133 amusyahputrasya is a compound-word." This statement, however, does not seem to be correct. P. 5.1.133 (dvundvamanojñādibhyas ca) only tells us that the suffix aka ( vun ) may occur after a dvandva compound and the words listed in the manojñādi gana. Hence we can have forms like gaupālapaśupālikā or mānojñaka etc. Now the expression amuş yapautra (but not amusyāhputra) occurs as one word in the manojñādi gana and hence, according to the sūtra in question, we can have a form like āmuşyaputraka. But the Sūtra itself does not say anything about the formation of amusyaputra, much less of amus yahputra. It would have been therefore better to state simply that amusyaputra as a compound from occurs in the manojñādi gana (P. 5.1.133)
On p. 123 line 3 we read idam ahum ak sabrāhmaṇāyanaputrasya veccikāputrasya prāņāpānay apakyntämi. On this, in App. B (p. 49 ), the editors have the following comment : “ It is better to read aksasya brāhmaṇā. yanaputras ya." But this may not be justified. The sutra ( 44.31 ) on which Dărila is commenting runs as idam aham-amuşyāyaṇasyāmuşyāh putrasya... Thus the Sūtra does not give any scope to name the individual, against whom the black magic is to be practised, by his personal name. The Sutra wants him to be referred to only by way of his father and mother.
The title of the text as given by Dārija himself is Kausikabhâsya. The same could have been retained without change.
Madhu Vidyā/638