________________
Shri Mahavir Jain Aradhana Kendra
www.kobatirth.org
Acharya Shri Kailassagarsuri Gyanmandir
PREFACE The discovery of Mādhava's commentary on the Rgveda is an important event in the history of Rgvedic exegesis. Mādhava is earlier than Sāyaṇācārya. In his commentary on the Rgveda, Sāyaṇācārya mentions? one Mādhavabhatta and quotesa a passage from the latter's commentary. This Mādhavabhatta is to be identified with Mādhava, son of SriVerikațărya, and author of the commentary, Rgarthadīpikā. As the passage quoted by Sāyaṇācārya occurs in the former's commentary), where it is not a quotation and is the commentator's own statement, there can be no doubt about the identity of Mādhavabhatta with Mādhava, son of SriVerkațārya. Sāyaṇācārya is indebted to Mādhava, as the former has utilised the latter's commentary, in writing his celebrated bhāsya on the RV.
The text of the Rgveda presents, on account of its remote antiquity, numerous difficulties of interpretation, which is therefore a serious problem. Sāyaṇācārya's was the only available commentary on the RV., uptill now. Several scholars have emphasised the untrustworthy character of Sāyaṇa's commentary on the following grounds :-(1) he was far removed from the time of the composition of the hymns of the Rgveda and therefore unable to enter thoroughly into the spirit and thought of that bygone age, (2) he was destitute of a historical sense and not well equipped with present day means, and methods of research, e.g.4, comparative philology etc., (3) no Vedic commentator flourished between Yāska, the earliest commentator (c.700B.C.)
1 RV. X. 86.1, Max Müller's 2nd ed. p. IV. 265.
2 माधवभट्टास्तु वि हि सोतोरित्येगिन्द्राण्या वाक्यमिति मन्यन्ते। तथा च तद्वचनम्इन्द्राण्यै कल्पितं हविः कश्चिन्मृगोऽदूदुषत् etc. See Indices and Appendices To Tbe Nirukta, Introduction pp. 31, 32.
3RV. X. 86.1.
4 A detailed comparative study of the two commentators will follow later on.
For Private and Personal Use Only
