Novelty of form and novelty of substance in seventeenth century Mīmāmsā

Journal of Indian Philosophy

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 481-494

  Mccrea, Lawrence ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 51349087435     PISSN: 00221791     EISSN: 15730395     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1022819303379     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bhattoji studied grammar with Śesa Krsna and Mīmā msā with Śan̄karabhatta, both famous teachers in late sixteenth century Varanasi (see Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 5: The Philosophy of the Grammarians, Princeton University Press, 1990, p. 241);
2. Jagannātha's father is said to have studied Mīmā msā with Khandadeva in Varanasi (see Nāgeśabhatta's commentary on verse 2 of Rasagan̄gādhara [Benares Sanskrit Series 12ff, 1903, p. 2]),
3. and Jagannātha himself studied with Śesa Krsna's son Śesa Vīreśvara (Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 5: Philosophy of the Grammarians, p. 215).
4. See, for example, Tattvabindu, ed. V.A. Ramaswami Sastri (Annamalai University Sanskrit Series 3, Madras, 1936), Introduction, p. 118;
5. Bhāttadīpikā, ed. S. Subrahmany Sastri (Madras, 1952), Vol. 4, p. ii;
6. Umesh Mishra's appendix to Ganganath Jha's, Purvaīmāmsā in its Sources (second ed., Varanasi: Benares Hindu University, 1964), p. 56.
7. Most notably, apart from Khandadeva's own work, Raghunātha Śiromani's Ākhyātavāda, Jagadīśa Tarkālamkāra's Śabdaśaktiprakāśikā, and Gadādharabhatta's Vyutpattivāda in the field of Nyāya, and, in the field of grammar, Bhattoji Dīksita's Vaiyā karanamatonmajjana, and Kaundabhatta's Vaiyākaranabhūsana (an extensive commentary upon the former).
8. Ed. A. Subrahmanya Sastri (Varanasi: Banaras Hindu University, 1970).
9. Chowkhambha Sanskrit Series 58 (Varanasi: Chowkhambha Sanskrit Series Office, 1923-1933), part 3, pp. 1-44.
10. nanu sarvam idam dhātvarthātiriktabhāvanā sadbhāve samañjasam \ na tu tasyām eva pramānam paśyāmah | Chowkhambha Sanskrit Series 58 ((ibid., p. 12).
11. Ed., with the commentary Prabhāvali of Śambhubhatta, by N.S. Ananta Krishna Sastri (Bombay: Nirnaya Sagar Press, 1921-1922), pp. 132-140.
12. Tāndyamahābrāhmana 19.7.3, quoted in Śabara's Bhāsya on Mīmāmsāsūtra 1.4.1 (Anandashrama Sanskrit Series 97, 1970 [second ed.], Vol. 2, pp. 268ff).
13. "Who desires cows" ("paśukāmah") is carried over elliptically from the preceding sentence (see Tāndya Mahābrāhmana, ed. Ānandacandra Vedantavāgīś a, Bibliotheca Indica, New Series, Nos 207ff, Vol. II, 1874, p. 496).
14. See, for example, Āpadeva's Mīmāmsānyā yaprakāśa, edited with the commentary Bhāttālamkā ra of Anantadeva (Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series 268ff, Varanasi, 1921, pp. 52ff),
15. Dinakarabhatta's Bhāttadinakara on PMS 1.4.2 [Sarasvati Bhandar, Ramnagar Fort, Mīmāmsā Ms #30, 46r-48v],
16. Gāgābhatta's Bhāttacintāmani on PMS 1.4.1 (Adyar Library, Ms #64971, pp. 55-58).
17. The work is unpublished, and survives only in a single manuscript - see A Descriptive Catalogue of the Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Tanjore Maharaja Serfoji's Sarasvati Mahal Library, Tanjore, Vol. XII, Pūrva- mīmāmsā and Uttara-mīmāmsā (Srirangam: Vani Vilas Press, 1931), pp. 5159-5160. The manuscript is from the library of Gāmbhīrarāya Dīksita, father of Bhāskararā ya, who seems to have played a major role in promulgating Khandadeva's Mīmāmsā in South India in the early eighteenth century.
18. One of Bhāskararāya's surviving Mīmāmsā works is the Vādakutūhala, purportedly the transcript of a debate between himself and one Svāmiśāstrī, in which Bhāskararāya defends and the latter attacks Khandadeva's position on matvarthalaksanā (see Descriptive Catalogue of Sansrkit Manuscripts in the Adyar Library, Vol. IX [Madras: Adyar Library, 1952], pp. 139-140).
19. One other short work of Khandadeva survives, also in a single manuscript belonging to Gāmbhīrarāya Dīksita (Descriptive Catalogue of Sansrkit Manuscripts in the Adyar Library, ibid., pp. 5157-5159) - its title is Sthānino Bhāvanāvācitvakhandanam ("Rejection of the View that Bhāvanā is Expressed by the Substituend").
20. Mīmāmsākaustubha on 1.4.2 (op. cit., part 2, p. 160 - see also pp. 157-158).
21. For a fuller discussion of the Arunādhikarana, see my article "The Hierarchical Organization of Language in Mīmāmsā Interpretive Theory," Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 28, Nos. 5-6 (December 2000), pp. 442ff.
22. Or more precisely, with the compounds "pink-eyed" (pin̄gāksyā) and "one-year-old" (ekahā yanyā); the Mīmāmsakas, with the support of Sanskrit grammatical theory, argue that each compounds directly designates the possessor of these attributes (here understood, by context or implication, to be a cow) - unlike the morphologically simple word "red" (aruna), which designates a particular quality, rather than its possessor; see, especially, Kumārila's Tantravārttika on PMS 3.1.12 (Anandashrama Sanskrit Series 97, Vol. 4, pp. 33-41.
23. Kumārila's Tantravārttika on PMS 3.1.12 Ibid., pp. 162-164.
24. Kumārila's Tantravārttika on PMS 3.1.12 Ibid., pp. 164-165.
25. Kumārila's Tantravārttika on PMS 3.1.12 Ibid., pp. 165-166.
26. Bhāttadīpikā on 1.4.2 (op. cit., pp. 75-80).
27. . . . matvarthalaksanāvaśyakīti prāñcah || vastutas tu drstānte 'pi somasya karanatvenaiva bhāvanā yām evānvayah . . . ekakaranāvaruddhe 'pi karanāntarasya bhinnanirūpitasya prakāratayā bhāvanā nvayopapatteh | na hi yāgakaranatvam bhāvanānirūpitam, api tu svarganirūptiam | ataś ca yathāivānyanirū pitam api tatkaranatvam prakāratayā bhāvanāyām anveti, tathaiva somakaranatvam api yāganirūpitam | ubhayatra tattannirūpakatvasya pārsthikabodhalabhyatvāc ca na ko 'pi virodha iti nāsminn api pakse yady api matvarthalaksanā, thatāpi viśesanavidhikrtagunayāgobhayaviśistabhā vanāvidhigauravam āpadyamānam nāpahnotum śakyam | (Bhāttadīpikā on 1.4.2 (ibid., p. 76).
28. Bhāttadīpikā on 1.4.2 (Ibid., p. 76.