English
Thus we have, besides the l§rauta and Grihya-sAtras of Apastamba, a collection of Sllma- yfi<5h&rika-sfttras belonging to the same Charana of the Apastarabas, the members of which, as Kumllrila tells us, followed one of the S&kh&s of the Taittirtya- veda. Another collection of Dharmasiitras, which, however, is liable to critical doubts, belongs to the Gautamas, a Charana of the S£lma-veda. It has been printed at Calcutta. A third one bears the name of Vishnu, and has been printed at Calcutta, enlarged by modem additions written in Slokas. The y^sishtha-dharma-^Hstra, printed at Calcutta, belongs likewise, at least in part, to this class of Dhar- masiitras. Whether we shall succeed in finding still more of these SAtra works is questionable, though prose quotations from other Dharma6ftstras would justify this expectation. There can be no doubt, how- ever, that all the genuine metrical Dharma^ftstras *' Baudh&jana sajs, the highest law is that contained in each Yeda, which we shall follow in our explanation ; the second is the traditional law ; the third, the customs of eminent sages." TRiniiKSTAB. 185 which we possess now, are, without any exception, nothing but more modem texts of earlier Siitra^ works or Eula-dharmas belonging originally to certain Yedic Charanas.^ To return to those works of the Pdrrshada litera- ture which are known by the name of Pr&tis&khyas, I may refer for further particulars to Dr. Roth's valuable observations on this branch of literature. To him belongs the merit of having first pointed out in manuscript four of these works. The first is ascribed to j^aunaka, and belongs to the i§&kala-6llkhd. of the Rig-veda. I call it the ddrkala-pr&ti6llkhya, not the Sai6ira-pr&ti6ftkhya, though it pretends to follow, like l§aunaka's Anukramani, the Sanhitd, of the Saii^iriya-6dkhl^ which is itself a subordinate branch of the Sftkala-fid^khd..^ j§i6ira, however, is never mentioned in this or any other Priltifi&khya, as an authority on grammatical questions. It is doubtftil how far the rules given by Saunaka ^ See Prof. Stenzler's Introduction to his edition of Yajna* valkya, and his remarks on Indian Law-books in Indische Studien, i. 232. irar yaw ^i gifwV ^Pr^wV mwc ^tfir?;: ^ -w*!^ sKiMHPi^i5 irrarit ^f5^^*ifiif?l ^i The verses to which the commentary refers are not in the MS. See also Vishttu Parana, p. 277, n.'^n^ ^fllO€|l<|{ ^f^rTRTt K 4 L36 :Tlrt\feaidiya, can Tae considered as represehtaii sral opmion of tlie S&kalas. Saunaka, n ^v rote fop the 6&kalaS) to whom he likewis lus Anukramanl. But the author of ti ."I::iya occasionally quotes the opinions of tl as difiRerent from his owd, and speaks < the same manner as he alludes to tl of other grammarians. He mentions ( s SAkalas as observing^ a certain peculu tion out of respect for their master, wl ttave sanctioned it in liis own rules. Wl ^eT was is difficult to say. But it is mo same who {i. 52.) is called the Mast€ (fnend of ♦!•*> V*^cl.^- an.1 wlir. f\. 22S ^ ' -— of the Veda), and "who (i. akalyapit4, the fatlier of SUkalya. H It we may judge by i. 232., differed fro *he younger 6&kalya. In i. 185. we me gam under the name of g&kalya Sthavii -fclie elder, and he is theire represented as a 0, pronunciation from -which l§aunaka, t -f the Pr&tis&fehya, dissents. In i. IS ^^opts the opinion of jSHkalya, and in i. 2C mentions him with approbation. But ^ only tend to show that iSaunaka does t -f^imself \K>und to follow either ;§d.kalya ^ of6&-^8lya,itnplicitly.i ^ not a single MS. at present existing of 1 ^n ^ticli the Tules of our Pr&ti64khya j observed, and the same applies to the MJ 5 2: Z'^l "" "^^ • o° of three Ach&r ralTlgAKHYAS. 137 of the other Vedas. The rules of the Pr&ti6&khyas were not intended for written literature, they were only to serve as a guide in the instruction of pupils who had to learn the text of the Veda by heart, and to repeat it, as part of their daily devotions^ As l§au naka was himself a member of the i§llkalas, we may quote his Prd.tifi&khya as the S&kala-prdrti£id.khya. But strictly speaking it could only be called one of the S&kala-prd,ti^khyas, preserved by the pupils of Saunaka, who, soon after, formed themselves into a new Charana, under the name of Saunakiyas.^ The second PrUtifidkhya belongs to the ancient text of the Yajur-veda. There is only one MS. of it at the Bodleian Library, together with a considerable portion of the Commentary, the Tribh^hyaratna. Professor Wilson, in his catalogue of the Mackenzie Collection (i. 7, No* xxxiii.) mentions another MS., " The Prllti6Akhya of the Yajur-veda, with a BhA- shya or comment, entitled Tribh^hyaratna, from its being said to be the substance of the works of three celebrated sages, Atreya, Mahisha, and Va- raruchi." To what particular jSfi,kh& of the Black Yajur-veda this Prfi,tis&khya belonged it is difficult to detennine* It quotes several of the Charanas, be longing to the Black Yajur-veda, such as Taittiriyakas, Ahvarakas, Ukhya, the founder of the Aukhiyas, and Bh&radv&ja, the founder of the Bh&radv&jins. It also alludes to Mimftnsakas, a school of philosophers, men tioned in none of the other Pr&tiS&khyas. Until we receive some more coi^plete MSS. of this work we can only say that it belongs to some S&kh& of the Tait* tinya or Black Yajur-veda. Its grammatical termi- 1 This Pr&ti^khya has lately been edited by M. A. Begnier, in the ** Journal Asintiqae.*' S8 guage Vedas- nised ^ is not the isuse^ -^ eompo^ skrit, idiom^ - Som. __ migKt \>e expected, is^ less advanced and tficial than tbat of the Pr&ti6&khya of the .r White Yajur-veda- ird Pr6,ti&6,khya is ascribed to the S&khA, ol liyandinas, one of the sabdivisions of the ^^^im^ • though, perhaps, on the same grounds *3tated ahove with regard to the S^kala-priltl :■.-<; might seem more correct to call it the Prft. of the K&ty&yanlyas, a suhdivision of th< <iina8. It was composed by K&ty&yana, an ■^^^^derable advance in grammatical techni There is nothing in its style that could b A tenable argument why E&ty&yana, th the Pratififtkhya should not be the same a *^'*^® contemporary and critic of PItnini ehat P4nini8 rules are intended for a lar ioh was no longer the pure Sanskrit of th d**^® V edic idiom is treated by him as an ea liereas KUty^yana's Pr&ti6likhya seems t period when there existed but one reco^ ,ture, that of the RlsMs. This, howevei -' -fc^ ^e 'J*'^- KAty&yana himself alludes t ■C^liat there -were at least two language ^ two words," he says (i. 17.) , " om an ^sed in the beginning of a chapter ; but a ^he Vedas, otKo in the Bhftshyas.'' As Kj :- ^^aelf writes in the Bh­a or the commc ^here is nd reason why he should not hai ^es on the grammar of the profane Sa ^11 as on the pronunciation of the "Ved ^ :K&tyfi.yana's Stltras are now found i Indi^' t* fbAthSIkhtas: 139 ^ted ipdssimis verbis in Fftnini's grammar; Thid might seem strange ; but we know that not all the Siitras how incorporated in his grammar came from P&nini himself, and it is most likely that Efttyftyana, In writing his supplementary notes to P&nini, simply repeated some of his Pr&tififtkhya-s^ltras, and that, at a later time, some of these so-called V&rttikas became part of the text of Pftnini. The fourth Pr&ti6&khya belongs to the Atharva- veda. It is called l§aunakiy& Chftturftdhy&yikl^ and was, therefore, no doubt the property of the Sauna- ktyas, a Gharana of the Atharva-veda. The name of the author is unknown, and we possess as yet but one MS., and that a very imperfect one, in the Royal Library at Berlin. That it belongs to a j§&kh& of the Atharvana, is indicated by its very beginning^, and one of its first rules is quoted by the commentator on the lSd,kala-prd.ti6&khya as belonging to an Atharvana* pr&tiiMUchya.* Besides, in the fourth chapter of the fourth and last book special reference is made to Atharvana sacrifices.' We can hardly suppose that l^aunaka, the author of the Pr&ti6ftkhya of the Rig- veda, was at the same time the author of this Sau- nakiy& Chfttur&dhyllyik^ Saunaka, whose name never occurs in the l§ftkala-prftti6ftkhyaS is quoted in I still doabt the genainenem of the first verse of the ^kala- pr&tisakhya where Saunaka's name has been foisted in at the end.