Sambodhi 1982 Vol 11

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

Page 31

N. M. Kansara
each, viz the Prama-laks 0146 and the Subda-lakṣma, alias the Pañca-gra. ntbi-vyākarana, respectively,
.
Jineśvara sūri further adds, in his auto-commentary, on the Pramāla. kş 01, that before conposing his work on grapmer, Buddhisāgara üri had gone througа the works of Pāņini, Candra Ja neodra, Vibrānta and Durga's commen'ary, that the work was verse bound in different metres, that it incorporated Datu, Sūtra, Giņa, Uņāli, etc and that it was supposed to treat both the Sanskrit aid Prakrit words.48 Daaneśvara too alludes to Bidhisāgara;ūri's work with a sens: of reverence saying that it included the difficult discussions in the Fakkikās, that it was divided into Adhyāyas and that it was kaown as Pañca granthi. 49
Some of the Mss. in different Jaina Bhāndaras in Gujarat and Ra. jasthana, call his work Buddhisāgara vyākarana in the lefthand margia at th: top on each of the folios which fact seems have popularised the alternative name of this work as “Bupdhisāgara-vyākaraņa." But the author himself, as also his disciple Dhaneśvara has specifically mentioned that the work was entitled 'Pañca-granthi.'50 The title suggests that the work was supposed to incorporate all the five aspects of Sanskrit Grammar such as Dhātu, Gaņa, Urādi, Lingāouśāna and Sikşă in a single work wbile the cel :biated grammarians like Pāņiai Candra and others chose to compose independeat works on each of this aspects. The necessity of incorporating all these a pects in a single work seems to have been felt as early as a least the sixto or seventh century A D. during whick Vāmana and Jayāditya of the Kas kā fa ne flourished. 51
Non, let us see, on the basis of the very contents of the work itself whether the statements of Jioeśvarasuri and Dhanesvara stand corroborated or not. We must here clarify that the analysis, givea below of the coutents of the Panca-grantb -vykarana of Buddhisāgai asuri is based on the very general suavey of yet unpublished version of the work in the Mss., that it is being published here for the first time since the historians of Sanskrit Grammar have so far givea no information beyond the names of work and its auther, the date of the work and a sur nise about the likelihood of the work baving contained a Lingānuśāsana,52
This work seems to have been originally planned to have two Adhikāras one dealing with the Sanskrit language and the other treating the Prakrit lauguage as has been alluded to by Jinesvāraguri 53 But the wore that has come down to us as the Pañca-granthi does