Sambodhi 1976 Vol 05

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 23

*MADHAVA'S RGVEDAV YAKHYA AND THE SYSTEM OF GALIT AS
K. P. Jog
1 In my paper 'On the Galita pradipa of Lakşmıdharasūri', I referred to Madhava's Rgvedavyakhya and observed “It is noticed that Madhaya has taken his cue from the presence and absence of a galila while interpreting many a Rgvedic passage but it is a matter of regret that later commentators have not taken cognisance of these important observations of Madhava." I was indeed aware that c. K. RAJA, who edited and published Madhava's Rgvedavyakhya2 had noted the importance of his observations and had an intention to discuss this point after the entire available commentary was published: It appears that his controversy with KASHIKAR regarding the problem of galitas4 was perhaps the begining of his discussion on this point This his discussion attracted my attention to Madhava's treatment of the galitas in his commentary on Rgveda, Also I noticed that RAJA could not realise his intention in bis life-time. As such, I decided to take up the unfinished task. However, when I began my work, I found it necessary hrst to ascertain if there is any system of galitas and came to notice that Sakalya's use of the galita appears to be regulated by certain principley, While I was doing that work, I had to defer the dlacussion on Madhava's use of the galitas in his interpretation of Rgvedic passages, for some time. Now I propose to take up the game in the light of a few examples from the first Adhyaya of the first Aştaka of the Rgveda Samhita 2. Flest, I may note two important remarks of Madhava wbich would considerably facilitate the discussion on his procedure,
() On 1.25.1, he says: tha vakyatmakesu yesu padavelayan hano padanam sakalyah karott tatkuranam samayanukramanyam uktam / duck ekartho vidyate /?
'The reason why Šakalya omits or includes (certain) padas 'words of the nature of a pbraso while (writing) the padapatha (Pp) is stated (by me) In the Samayānukramani, Both the res bavo (only) one meaning.'
(11) On 1.31.8, he says : nal patikah padah pavamane daśame ca visrstah / tvam no agne bahvatra. vrtetkan hanopad anayukiah | tutra karanam samayanukramangarh uktam/ tathanvesăm trikanarh catushanam ca vakyatmakanam itu jo
anam in hankith whatra