Book Title: Makaranda Madhukar Anand Mahendale Festshrift
Author(s): M A Dhaky, Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Shardaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre

Previous | Next

Page 101
________________ 90 Anna Radicchi Makaranda see that Purusottamadeva, who was writing in the XII century, frequently mentions Jayāditya in the first five adhyāyas as the author of the Kāśikāvrtti, from the VI adhyāya onwards Jayāditya is no longer named, but a Vāmanavrtti is referred to. Another important edition we owe to S. Ch. Chakravarti, that of the Nyāsa or Kāśikāvivaranapañjikā, marked a turning-point in these studies. Vol. I already contained sūtra 1. 1. 5 under which the Nyāsakāra Jinendra pointed out Jayāditya and Vāmana's respective contrasting opinions and mentioned the text of a vrtti by Jayāditya on 7. 2. 11. "Did Jayāditya write a complete commentary on the Kāśikā ?", wondered Chakravartió. The reference in the Nyāsa to a vrtti by Jayāditya on the seventh adhyāya certainly contrasted with all previous attributions of parts of the vrtti to the two authors.' The Nyāsa, carefully-studied with the support of the Padanañjarī, proved in fact to be the most important source for discovering and listing the internal contradictions in the Kāśikāvrtti. Initially, the research concentrated on linking contradictions to differences of opinions between the two authors, Jayāditya and Vāmana. Dineshchandra Bhattacharya's work belongs to and emerges during this first period. In 1922, in “Pāṇinian Studies in Bengal", he expressed his opinion, based on examination of references in the Nyāsa, that Jayāditya had himself completed his vrtti and Jinendra had at least partial access to its lost portions. Vāmana's vrtti thus seemed to assume the role of a revised enlarged edition of Jayāditya. What then led Vāmana to revise only the last three chapters remained unexplained. Bhattacharya came back to the double authorship of the Kāśikāvrtti in 1946, in the Introduction to his edition of Purusottamadeva's Paribhāsāvrtti There he presented some ‘interesting facts' gathered from a careful analysis of the respective works of Jayāditya and Vāmana (i.e. the first five adhyāyas and the last three adhyāyas of the Kāśikāvrtti), which seemed to demonstrate that Jayāditya and Vāmana were separated by 'some length of time'. This should lead, in his opinion, to the abandonment of the current view that Jayāditya and Vamana were contemporaries or that Vāmana 'came soon after Jayāditya', as stated by S. K. Belvalkar in his Systems of Sanskrit Grammar. Bhattacharya counted 42 references to previous writers (under expressions

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284