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

Previous | Next

Page 102
________________ Vivaksā in Käsikävýtti : Jayāditya and Vamana such as 'kecit', etc.) in Jayāditya's larger portion (I-V) as opposed to 103 references in Vāmana's smaller portion (VI-VIII). He then noted that in the section of the Vedic accent (VI. 2), all the illustrations under the sūtras of the II and the III adhyāyas commented on by Jayāditya were collected, but others were also added. Finally, the “polemical discussions'in which Vāmana indulges, practically inexistent in Jayāditya. It seems, however, that rather than ‘polemical discussions', it is a matter of a clear tendency on Vāmana's part to go into the intricacies of the rules and grammatical technique, also constantly referring, in many passages cited by Bhattacharya, to the paribhāsās, the rules of interpretation. The increase in reference to the other authors, as well as an increase in the number of examples certainly accounted for a period of time between Jayāditya and Vāmana longer than what scholars had generally been ready to concede. "Vāmana could never be supposed to have revised the last three chapters of Jayāditya's vrtti before 700 A. D. and probably did so about 750 A. D.", according to Bhattacharya, who placed Jayāditya in 650 A. D. However, it seems that–indeed Vāmana's attention to the interpretation of the rules and interpretative technique also indicatesperhaps more than anything else, a later time in respect to Jayāditya, near the Middle Ages. In the 60's, Yutaka Ojihara began systematic research on facts of 'Incoherence interne chez la Kāśikā”. Would a complete collection of these facts, Ojihara wondered, have served, if not to revise, at least to verify the standard opinion on the division of the extant text of the Kāśikā between Jayāditya and Vāmana ? Ojihara's research was not completed and did not solve the problem of the division of the parts of the text of the Kāśikāvștti as we know it today between Jayāditya and Vamana. Judging from the state of research, Ojihara believed that each of them had independently commented, in his own time, on all of Pāṇini's grammar. Ojihara's articles initiated the final stage in the history of these studies. By now the most important references from the Nyāsa and the Padamañjarī, as well as from native commentators, have all been taken, and confidence has been lost that we may be able to learn more about the original work by Jayaditya and Vāmana. The II volume of the latest edition of the Kāśikā with Nyasa and Padamañjari edited by J. Sh. L. Tripathi and S. Malaviya, has

Loading...

Page Navigation
1 ... 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