________________
Contribution of Śramaņas to the Indian ..... : 85 elaborately explained in the latter.28 Thus in the light of this acknowledgement Buddhaghoșa's comment, - “Commentators have often digressed in the course of their explanations and various narratives and episodes have found their way into the commentaries,” seems to be unwanted. It is the literal meaning of the word Atthakathā. Let us try to find out its special meaning or its use or meaning that is generally implied or followed. As it will help us a lot in arriving at the right implication of the word Aụthakathā, it is advisable to quote the following - “Although Atthakathā refers to all commentarial literature, as it did during the Anuradhapura period (third century B. C. - tenth century A. D.) when it had even a wider application and included all literary works other than the Tripitaka, today it is used when referring to the commentaries on the Tripitaka. 29?? The sentence implies to say that while formerly all literary works other than the Tripițaka came under its purview, today it refers to the commentaries on the Tripițaka only. It is to be noted that it's first meaning or definition is based on it's meaning as it comes in the Saratthadipani - “Ațhakathā is that which states the meaning.” As such it has been interpreted as “a general term meaning exposition of the sense, explanation, commentary.” But truly speaking, nowa days, it stands for the meaning just pointed out above. Thus, the word Aųhakathā had/has been an epithet used as a name given to exegetical literature on an individual text or a group of texts belonging to the same discipline. Not only the commentators or compilers of the Sihalaţthkathā always remained vigilant to maintain this tradition, but Buddhaghoșa also stuck to this practice as he did not name his work Visuddhimagga as Atthakathā even though being the outcome of the exposition of two verses from the Samyuttanikāya. The name Pātimokkha-aţthakathā, Jatakaatthkathā, and Vibhangappakaraṇa-atthakathā; and Vinayaatthakathā, Suttata-atthakathā and Abhidhamma-aţthakathā may be put forward as illustrations. The first three as examples of exegetical literature on the specifically named texts and the next three on group
