CHAPTER I

GENERAL INTRODUCTION
Ancient Indian scholars went deep into the science of grammar which
spurred the development of modern philology.

Pini's grammar which is a model of the most perfect description of the

science of grammar suffered in its interpretation since after its composition by 5th
centaury B.C. Scholars from the olden days, and the present generation, including
the traditionalists and modern researchers in west and in India have been
struggling hard to reach solution on the network of problems the great book
Adhyy has raised and left unanswered. A generation of grammarians was
found to criticize and verify the book.

In the later stage, some of the scholars tried to simplify Pini's grammar
and to make it reach the public. Sanskrit grammar has many eminent names to
point out who contributed a lot to the field. Other than Munitraya' (Pini,
Ktyyana and Patajali), Candra, Bhoja, kayana etc. also were great
authorities of grammar.

Melputtr Nryaa Bhaa says in his

Apinyaprmyasdhanam,

{hxH |h x i {x{ SxpVnr

E{iP` x J ni xC*
RMEn i Mhi {hx& |E El
1

{H {hxS{xni v%{ E{ E{&**

Some say that what is said by Pini is authoritative, not the treatises of
Candra, Bhoja and others, this is most flimsy; for those who know much do not
speak without evidence, that more people prefer to a thing is due to its merits.
How was it before Pini? Pini himself quotes what was stated by (his)
predecessors and even if there be a conflict an option is to be presumed.

Vedavysa, Sakarcrya, Murrimira, Surewarcrya, Srhara etc who

were the best among the advocators of Veda have accepted the grammarians other
than 'Munitraya'. There is a saying that "o] Eh xx i Ei" .
The words like xn, x{v {] Si, & etc; are justified by this
concept.

Candra tried to simplify the methodology accepted by Pini.

Candragomin's grammar attempts to remove the techniques employed by Pini
as a way to simplify the whole. He was in the way of greater brevity and
precision. He has reduced the number of Pratyhrastras by combining the
Stras ] and h into h*
1. Apinyaprmyasdhanam of Melputtr Nryaa Bha, given at the end of
Prakriysarvaswam, Dr.M.S.Menon (Ed), Guruvayur Devaswam, Guruvayur, 1998, P1.

Bhoja includes Paribhpha, Gaapha, Udi and Lignuasana in

his abdnusana which were treated separately in all other Vykaraas. His
grammar is written on the basis of Cndravykaraa and Pinyavykaraa.
The saying quoted by Yudhishthiramimamsaka

xVV xpi Ehhi

{nixx E ix xi {hxM{n 2
shows the scope of further study on Painyavykaraa.

This study concentrates on the concept of Krakas accepted by Pini,

Candra and Bhoja. The Kraka system provides the key to Pinian syntax.
Krakas are the relation between a noun and a verb. In the formulation of the
structure of language, Krakas play a vital role. It accounts to a number of
generalisations particularly concerning the following aspects of Sanskrit sentence
structure.

1.

The relation between the syntax of actives, passives and statives.

2.

The relation between the sentences and nominal.

3.

The linking of cases to meanings.

4.

The grammatical functions associated implicitly with gerunds and

infinitives.

2. Mimasak ,Yudhishthir, Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, Samchalak Bharatiy Pracyavidya

Pratishthan, Ajmer, 1978, p.501.

Before going into details discussion is done on the history and life of
Pini, Candra and Bhoja and the characteristics of their works.
PINI
There is no need of an introduction to Pini because a variety of research
work has come out on his book. Still here an effort is made to document some
facts regarding Pini and his work.

Pini is a name which will be remembered by all the lovers of Language

till Sanskrit exists. His work Adhyy is an encyclopedic monument. It is an
outstanding research work with technical perfection.

Pini is called as Dkputra by Patajali. From Kathsaritsgara it is

understood that Pini was a contemporary of Ktyyana and Vyi and
Indradatta. It says that Pini studied with them at the house of Updhyya.
Pacatantra says a different story about the death of Pini.

Eh Eii |hx |x {hx& 3

Pini's grammar is intact. Pini with the help of his ancestors reveals the
universally accepted concepts in a systematic way.
3. Pacatantra, Mitrasamprpti, Ramcharan Guptha (Ed), MLBD, 1996, v.36

Date of Pini
Date of pini is fixed by the scholars and almost universally accepted
between fifth and sixth century B.C. Historians place Pini at Lahore and he
was known by several names such as alanki, ltura, Dkputra and Ahika.
Mahbhya and Kika mention a student of Pini as Kautsa. (+xx Ei:

{hx ={x Ei: {hx).4 It is said that Upavara was his teacher and
Pigaa, the author of Chandastra, was his brother.

Technical Devices in Adhyy

Atdhyy begins with fourteen ivastras which are otherwise known as
Mhewarastras. This is a peculiar kind of arrangement of Sanskrit alphabets.
This arrangement is the most wonderful technique of Pini with the help of
which he made Pratyhras. Pini made forty one Pratyhras.

Adhyy can be understood better with the help of some related texts.
They are Dhtupha, Gaapha, Udistras, PhitStras and Lignusana.

Dhtupha.
Pini groups the Dhtus in ten sections and introduces their augments or
Vikaraas. These groups are Bhvdi, Addi, Juhotydi, Svdi, Divdi, Tuddi,
Rudhdi, Tandi, Krydi and Curdi.
4. Kikvtti of Jayditya- Vmana, Srnyaa Mira (Ed), Ratna Publications, Varanasi, 1985,
on AS 3/2/108

About the authorship of Dhtupha controversies still exist. Depending

on the views of Ktyyana, George Cardona puts forward evidences from
5

Mahbhya to prove that there was a non-Pinian list of Dhtus. Accoding

to Ngea, the commentator of Mahbhya, Bhmasena made the meaning
entries along with the roots. The tmanepada or Parasmaipada terminations
which are produced by the Dhtus along with them show that there was a listing
system before Pini. The technique of using 'it' to recognize the tmanepada
and Parasmaipada termination is really commendable.

Gaapha
The arrangements of nominal stems are known as Gaapha. There are
two types of Gaas, some possessing definite number and the other is that which
has no such restriction. Controversy exists in the authorship of Gaapha also.
6

George Cardona says that post Pinians also contributed a lot to this section.

In the explanation of nominal stems, Gaapha brings brevity and clarity. This
also can be considered as an outstanding technique of Pini to describe his
grammar.

The Udistras.
Affixes are introduced by the Stras in the derivation of nominal stems.
Pacapd

and

Daapd

are

its

two

5. Cardona George, Pini - His work and its Traditions, MLBD, Varanasi, 1988, p.230.
6. Ibid, p.232.

sections.

In connection with Udi, Pini introduces two aphorisms. One is

'Udayo bahuam' (AS3/3/1) and the other is 'Tabhymanyatrodaya'
(AS3/4/75). The two sections of Udi help to know Prtipadikatva and
Prayogrhatva of words which are not otherwise derived.

Phitstra
PhitStras deal with the rules of accentuation. This is a very small portion.
They are called as PhitStras because they begin with the Stra 'Phisonta udtta'

Lignusana
This text consists of about two hundred aphorisms. These aphorisms
attribute the gender of nominal stems in accordance with their meaning and
structure. Their presentation is done under the following headings i.e. Feminine,
Masculine, Neuter, Feminine- Masculine, Masculine - Neuter. In the last chapter
the nouns which can be used in anyone of the genders are listed. At some
occasions, Pini introduces certain aphorisms which indicate the gender with
significance j Hx (AS3/3/18), { Y P: (AS3/3/114) etc. But Patajali
says in Mahbhya on (AS2/1/36) that 'RM EiRM'.
There

is

dispute

in

the

authorship

of

Lignusana

also.

Yudhishthiramimamsaka exemplifies a lot of internal evidences from Patajali

and Ktyyana to settle the authorship of Lignusana to Pini.

Pinian rules can be clearly understood only with the help of these texts.

Adhyy contains eight chapters and each chapter is divided into four
pdas. The contents of the chapters are given below.

Chapter I

Major definitional and interpretational rules,

Adideastras, tmanepada, Parasmaipada
rules, Krakas.

Chapter II

Compounds.
Nominal inflection.
Number and gender of compounds.
Replacement of roots.
Elision by luk.

Chapter III San.

Kt.
Ti.

Chapter IV-V

Subanta.
Strpratyaya.
Taddhita.

Chapter VI-VII

Doubling rules.
Samprasraa.
Samhita.
gama.

Accents.
Aga.

Chapter VIII

Doubling rules related to a pada, accent

related to a pada.

The whole portion of Adhyy is divided into two by the Stra

{jr.

By this Stra seven and a quarter portion is called

Sapdasaptdhyy and the left three Pdas are known as Tripd.

Every topic is introduced with an 'Adhikra Stra'. Application of

the operational rules is possible with the help of interpretational rules.

There are different kinds of Stras in Adhyy. They are Y

(technical rules), { (interpretive rule), v (operational rules), x
(restriction rules), +in (extention rule), +vE

x{ix (adho rules) and |iv (Negation rule).

(heading rules),

10

The Stra { nnY (AS1/1/68) regulates the meaning of

words. It is a matter beyond doubt that Pini got a lot of information and help
from his predecessors and with all these he established the credibility of his
work equal to that of four Vedas. By recording the Sanskrit language of his age,
Pini established a position of his own in the field of linguistics. A lot of
scholars inside and outside India were and are attracted towards the study of
Sanskrit grammar seeing the highly intellectual and precise work of Pini.

A lot of commentators wrote commentaries on Adhyy. Bhya

itself is a big commentary on Adhyy. Many books of different kinds were
written on the basis of Adhyy. Even now Pinian school is very much
established in India and abroad.

CANDRA
Candra was a well-known grammarian in the grammatical field of
Bengal. Candragomin thoroughly studied the grammar of Pini, Ktyyana
and Patajali and he did utilize their works to write his grammar. He also
noticed the changes that came over in Sanskrit language after Mahbhya. He
tried to improve the form and matter of their Stras, Vrtikas and Iis. Dr
Belvalker observes Candragomin as a Bauddha, and he observes that
Candragomin might have written his grammar for the benefit of the members of

11
7

his church. The first verse in Cndravykaraa also says that Candra was a
Buddhist.

r |h Y VMi M *
P{]{hSi nIh**

According to kalhaa, by the order of the king Abhimanyu who was the
king of Kashmir; Candra spread Mahbhya in Kashmir. [SxpSnvn

iknM* |ii S Eh Ei**]8. But it is not known from

Kalhana that Candrcrya was born in which part of India.

Yudhishthiramimamsaka notices another reason to consider Candrcrya

9

as a Bangali . He says that Bengalese pronounce the Antastha () and the

syllable () which occurs in 'Pavarga', similarly. Candrcrya has composed his
Udistras on the basis of the sequence of the final letters like pakra.

In order to explain the similarity of E

and E

Candrcrya has

illustrated some Udistras beginning from 90th Stra which show the
resemblance of M, , +, etc. In the Stra 92 of ivdigaa ,
7. Belvalker, S.K. Systems of Sanskrit Grammar, The Bharatiya Book Corporation, Delhi, 1997, P 29.
8. Rjataragin of Kalhaa, Ramatheja pandeya (Ed), Chaukamba Sanskrit series,
Varanasi 1998, V. 1/176.
9. Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, vol.I, P 571.

12

, =, , x, , , i, V, O etc are justified. Here the

Antasthas and the letters ending in Pavarga are included in the same group. So
Candrcrya can be considered as a Bangali. Yudhishthirammmsaka says that
he made such an entry because of the influence of his colloquial language.

Date of Candragomin
In Vkyapadya one can see a verse like this

{inM v Vx&*
xi Ji SxpSn& {x&** 10

It is stated here that Candrcrya reconstructed the Mahbhya which was

tending to extinct. According to Kalhana, Candrcrya lived at the time of the
king Abhimanyu who was the emperor of Kashmir, A reference in Rjataragi
is seen thus

SpSnvn iknM*
|ii S Eh Ei**

11

Patajali, the author of Mahbhya lived between 50 BC and 150 AD.

Yaovarman gains the credit for introducing a new system having given
significance to the derivation for the first time in India in his Ktantravykaraa.
10. Vkyapadya of Bharthari, K.A. Subrahmania Iyer (Ed), Deccan College, Poona,
1963, v. 2/489.
11. Rjataragin , v. 1/176.

13

Candra has also followed this way of description. So one can rightly
observe the dates of Candragomin in between the dates of Yaovarman and
Bharthari, that being 2nd and 3rd century AD.

Nature of Candragomin's work.

Candra writes in his Swopajavtti thus P{]{hSi nIh
which means that his grammar is P (brief, short) and {] (intelligible) as
compared to the grammar of Pini and {h (complete) as compared to the
grammar like Ktantra. In Pini's grammar some words are justified with the
help of Vrtikas and Iis of Mahbhya. But in Cndravykaraa, these words
are justified by the Strapha itself. That is why Candrcrya calls his grammar
as Sampra.

In Cndravtti and Vmanyalignusana the peculiarity of

Cndravykaraa is described as Sxp{YYE Eh . This may be called as

+YE because the Samjas are not treated here separately and wherever Pini
uses the word Y Candra uses the word xx.

In writing his grammar Candrcrya made use of Mahbhya a lot.

Candrcrya made almost the same alterations in the Stras as made by Patajali.
Also he omitted almost the same Stras in his grammar which were omitted by

14

Patajali. But still in a number of circumstances he rejects the commentary of

12

Patajali and accepts the view of some other grammarians .

Candrcrya wanted to rearrange the grammar of Pini with a vision

of bringing together all the rules that deal with the same phonetic and
grammatical operations as well as the same parts of speech. As stated earlier,
Candrcrya coined the Pratyhra of Pini, ] and h into

h and he accepts all the other Pratyhras of Pini. About 35 Stras

of Candragomin are incorporated in Kik. But here Kaiyaa remarks that

""+{hx& j {`&"

The total number of Cndrastras is about 3100 as against 4000 of

Pini. His work consists of six chapters of four pdas each and the matters
in the first two chapters of Pini are scattered here and there.

Cndravykaraa which is available today is not complete. Even

though at the end of the sixth chapter it can be seen that ' {i Sn

SxpEh ', there was a portion which deals with the Vedic grammar.
This may be lost in course of time. Yudhishthiramimamsaka points out a lot of
evidences

which

are

seen

in

Cndravykaraa

12. RE& |hx * CV3/2/9 compare with the Mahbhya of AS 4/2/100

13. Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, vol.I, P 526.

13

itself.

15

1) In the Cndraparibha one can see a paribha like this 'v

\Vxtxi'. This paribh works if and only if there is swaraprakaraa

in Cndravykaraa.
2) In the commentary of Stra ' { xS ' (CV1/1/145) it is written that

] I& which clearly hints that there was |G in the eighth

chapter.
3) It is written in the commentary of the Stra ' {i ES ' as 'SE&

i]- vxl& - {jEii' This means that ' ] ' will be

affected by Cakrnubandha. This is applicable only if the ' l ' is
included in that grammar.
4) In expounding the formula ' ixE&' Candrcrya
writes 'i ii I&'*
In Adhyy 3-1-3 and 6-1-185 Pini explains the circumstances to use
the suffix tavya and tavyat.

But in Candra grammar only one suffix ' i ' is found. Candrcrya
solves the problem by using the suffix tavya in an alternate sense with the vowel
which is neither pronounced too long nor too short.
5) In Cndravtti of 1/1/108 it is said that 'VxvM{xix S

I&'

16

6) In the vitti of the stra '+nxn f]' it is stated that i I&*

From all these evidences we can conclude that the seventh and eighth
chapters of Cndrvykaraa in which the Vaidika grammar is dealt has been
lost.

The learners of Siddhntakaumud almost omit the last part of

Kaumud because the Vaidika rules are dealt there. Likewise the learners of
Cndravykaraa may also sometimes have omitted the last two chapters
thinking that they are not so necessary and thus they might have lost currency
in course of time.

Accessory treatises of Cndragrammar

There are many books which were written by Candrcrya.
Cndravtti,

Lignusana,

Dhtupha,

Gaapha,

Udistra,

Upasargavtti, ikstra, Koa, etc. are some of the works written by

Candragomin. Dr. Belvakar attributes two more books to Candra and a poetry
named iyalekha and a drama named Loknanda.

14

A lot of commentaries might have written on Cndravykaraa. But

today only one commentary in Roman script is available in Germany. It is
seen that it was written by Dharmadsa.
14. Systems of Sanskrit Grammar, P 30.

But scholars like

17

Yudhishthiramimamsaka

proves

that

it

is

the

Swopajavtti

of

15

Candragomin.

He justifies the fact like this 'The jain writer Vardhamnasri writes Sxpi

ni nh nn x nk{n , nMik{nnV*'
In Cndravtti CV6/1/29 this opinion is seen like this 'ni nh nn,

x nk{n*'
Again he writes

'xi\ - xii xii <i Sxp&*'

In Cndravykaraa 1/1/39 also one can see these sentences.

Sayacrya also quotes this sentence as that of Candra. Like this in
several occasions, Syacrya and Vardhamna attribute Cndravtti to
Candrcrya. Sometimes Dharmadsa may have edited Cndravtti in Candra's
16

own words. These are the words of Yudhihirammmsaka .

Later history of Cndra School

Cndravykaraa was translated and freely circulated in Tibet. This shows
that numerous commentaries were written on the Cndravykaraa during the
palmy days of Buddhist literature.

The total disappearance of the system may be because; the work of a

Buddhist for the Buddhist community shared the fate of Buddhism.
15.
16.

Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, p.525.

Ibid. Vol.1, p.577.

18

BHOJA
King Bhojarja was a very good scholar in all branches of Sanskrit. He
also was an ideal king and he patronized a host of learnt paits.
Bhoja has 38 books to his credit.
I. Anthology:

1. Subhitanibandha

II. Architecture

2. Samargaastradhra

III. Astronomy&Astrology

3. dityapratpasiddhnta
4. Rjamrtaa
5. Rjamgka
6. Vidvajjanavallabha or
Prasnajna.

IV.Dharmastra

7. Bhujabalanibandha
8. Bhplapaddhati
9. Bhplasamuccaya
10. Caakyanti or Daanti
11. Crucary
13. Rjamrtaa
14. Rjanti
15. Vyavahrasamuccaya
16. Yuktikalpataru

V.Grammar &Nighau

17. Saraswatkahbharaa
18. Amaravykhy

19

19. Samyaminmmlik
VI.Lexicography

20. Nmamlik

VII.Medicine

21. yurvedasarvasva
22. Rjamgka
23. alihotra
24. Virntavidyvinoda

VIII. Music

25. Sagtapraka

IX.Philosophy

26. Rjamartaa (com. on

Patajali's Yogastra)
28. Siddhntasagraha
29. Siddhntasra

X.Prkta

30. ivatatvaratnakalik
31. Tattvapraka or
ivatattvapraka
32. Kumraka

X.Rhetorics

33. Sgrapraka
34. Saraswatkahbharaa

XII.Sanskrit poetry & prose 35. Camprmyaa

36.Mahkavijaya
37. Sgramajar
38. Vidyvinoda
A scholarly study of these has become indispensable because there are a
number of references from the works of Bhoja in various later texts.

20

He wrote a abdnusana named Saraswatkahbharaa. This is an

elaborate work on grammar. He writes at the beginning of Yogastravtti thus-

nxxx nvi {i\V Ei ,

k VMRMYE{ ixi tE *
CSi{ & hi j xrii hRMx{iS VxiV&**

This clearly says that author of Saraswatkahbharaa, Yogastravtti

and Rjamgga etc are the same.

Date of Bhoja
There were many kings in the name of Bhoja. But the author of
Saraswatkahbharaa is a very famous writer and benefactors of scholars. He
was the king of Dhra. King Bhoja was the son of the great king Sindhula and the
king Jayasimha was his son. He ruled the kingdom of Dhra. One 'Dnapatra' of
Bhoja of A.D 1021 is got and another of Jayasimha of 1055A.D is also got as
evidence for this period. So the date of Bhoja is between 1018 to 1053 A.D.

Bhoja-The renovator of Sanskrit

King Bhoja himself was a very good scholar and he at the same time gave
all kinds of help to scholars. During Bhoja`s period even wood cutters and

21

weavers spoke Sanskrit. Yudhishthirmimamsaka quotes a verse from the

Bhojaprabandha of Vallbha Deva which is an evidence for this

Shb{ uux & i`i {*

|{ xJ& {n i **17
In Bhojaprabandha one can also see a story. One day a scholar from
outside came to Dhrnagar. He could not get shelter anywhere. Then the
king's men told a weaver to vacate his house and give that house to the scholar.
Weaver approached the king and revealed his grief in a fascinating language.

E E x Si E
ixi E n Si E*
{hhbi{n{`
RE E **
On another occasion Bhoja told an old wood cutter as follows

Gxi vi Exv B i
Then he replied thus

x il vi Vx l vi vi18
All these instances show that Sanskrit was the language of common
people during that period.
17. Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, Vol.1, p.554.
18. For further details vide Samskt Vykara ast k Itihas, Vol.1p.554.

22

Saraswatkahbharaa
King Bhoja Deva wrote two books named Saraswatkahbharaa. One
is describing Alakra and the other is on grammar. There are eight chapters in
Saraswatkahbharaa. Each chapter is divided into four pdas. The total
number of Sutras are 6411.

During these days Paribhpha, Gaapha, Udistra etc. which

were portions of abdnusana, were expunged from the grammar. The result
was that the study of only abdnusana became important and Paribhpha,
Gaapha etc became unimportant. It became difficult for the learners to
understand these texts. To solve this difficulty Bhoja wrote his abdnusana
named Saraswatkahbharaa. He included Paribha, Lingnusana, Udi,
Gaapha etc. in each Prakaraa wherever it is necessary. Those who are
studying this abdnusana will not have to refer any other text to study
grammar other than Dhtupha. As the Gaapha etc are included in the text
the study of that also became necessary. Thus Saraswatkahbharaa gets a
place of its own in the field of grammar.

This text is seems to be written with the objective of protecting the

tradition preserved by Pini, Ktyyana and Patajali and to keep the fullfledged study of grammar alive. The manuscript of Saraswathkathbharaa is
got from Kerala also which shows that the study of Bhoja grammar was prevalent

23

here also. Melputtr Nryaa Bhaa in his Prakriysarvaswam quotes Bhoja in

several places and praises him in his Apinyaprmyasdhanam. Bhoja
substitutes many usages than Pini. This may be because Sanskrit might have
changed a little between the periods of Panini to Bhoja.

The first seven chapters of this text describe the Laukikaabdas and the
eighth chapter describes the Swaraprakaraa and the Vedic words.

Saraswatkahbharaa is based on Pini`s grammar and Cndra

grammar. In formulating the Stras and the division of Prakaraa he depends on
Cndragrammar more than Pini`s grammar.

The commentators of Saraswatkaahbharaa

I) Bhoja.
It is assumed that Bhoja himself wrote a commentary on
Saraswatkahbharaa. For this the following are the evidences
Vardhamna, the author of Gaaratnamahodadhi writes

Vi Jn n CVv x{i <iHx

He took this quotation from the stra " ViEJnS" (SKBh 3/3/101)
In the commentary of Amarakoa 1/2/24 Kraswm writes

24

<iE& * < <i =hn Vn Ei

Kraswm

took this quotation from

the vtti of Udistra

"i{n&" (SKBh 2/3/122). Also Daantha may have

written his commentary 'Hdayahri' on the basis of the commentary of
Bhoja Deva. This is understood from his own words

'<i

nhbxlxh]]ri

iEh`h

Pk

nh....'
Here two words ' vk' and 'ri' show that his commentary is an
abridged form of a large one. Also he may use the word 'Si' in
place of 'ri'.

II) Daantha Nryaa Bhaa.

There is one important commentary by Daantha Nryaa
Bhaa named Hdayahri. This is edited and published by Smbastri

III) Kalluka.
Kalluka wrote a commentary named 'Puruakra' on
Saraswaikahbharaa.
Manuscript library

The manuscript is available in Trivandrum

25

IV) Rmasimhadeva
Rmasimhadeva wrote a commentary on Saraswatkahbharaa named
Ratnadarpaa

Thus not only Pini, but Cadra and Bhoja have a respectable position in
the field of Sanskrit grammar.

--------------------