________________
99
INTRODUCTION On grammatical topics Kulanātha follows Vararuci, and sometimes ignores Hemacandra. In his gloss on Setu 6.53, for instance, he objects to samatta being explained as samasta, because, acc. to Vararuci 3.12, samasta becomes samattha; and not samatta, as allowed by Hemacandra 2.45. It may be noted that Krşnavipra, who usually follows Vararuci, seems in this case to follow Hemacandra, as he explains samatta as samasta.! Kulanātha's criticism might be directed at him, but we cannot be sure on the point,
Setutattvacandrikā
The Setutattvacandrikā, mentioned in connection with Kulanātha, marks an interesting phase of the progress of Prakrit studies in Bengal. It has been edited from a fairly well-preserved ms, written in Bengali characters in 1646 A.D.2. Unlike most of the other mss. utilized by us, this one gives the Prakrit text as well as the chāyā and the commentary. Besides, the scribe Viśvanātha seems to have been well-acquainted with the Prakrit language.
The SC is an anonymous work. It is significant that the initial mangala is absent. The commentary is, in fact, a compilation from other commentaries; and as we have already said, it is largely based on that of Kulanātha. The latter's gloss on numerous verses is anonymously reproduced, and occasionally supplemented by citations from other commentaries. There are also specific quotations from Kulanātha mentioned by name, more numerous than those from any other commentator cited in SC. Some of these quotations are mutilated, and contain mistakes, omissions and inaccuracies,
1 See Extracts 6.53. 2 See Rāvanavaha-mahākāvyam, ed. Basak Calcutta, 1959.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
