Amarakoshodghatana of Kshirasvamin (study)
by A. Yamuna Devi | 2012 | 77,297 words | ISBN-13: 9788193658048
This page relates ‘Grammatical explanation of Amarakosha’s preamble� of the study on the Amarakoshodghatana of Kshirasvamin (in English) which represents a commentary on the Amarakosha of Amarasimha. These ancient texts belong the Kosha or “lexicography� category of Sanskrit literature which deals with the analysis and meaning of technical words from a variety of subjects, such as cosmology, anatomy, medicine, hygiene. The Amarakosa itself is one of the earliest of such text, dating from the 6th century A.D., while the Amarakoshodghatana is the earliest known commentary on that work.
Grammatical explanation of ś’s preamble
[Full title: Derivation of words following ṇiԾ’s ūٰ (1): Grammatical explanation of ś’s preamble]
The preface of ś (I. 1. 3-5; pp. 2-3) elucidates the techniques employed in the text. This has been variously interpreted by the commentators.
ś mentions that the text is composed after the survey of all the existing ṣa and related texts. The gender of words are also suggested by their very form or by the adjacent words or by special adjectives; also the text declares that to indicate the difference between the words the dvandva compound is not employed, nor is there an 첹śṣa compound; and there is no jumbling of words in different genders; and all are presented in proper sequence.
The word ٰṣu is used to denote that a word is used in all three genders; when the word is to be used only in masculine and feminine genders the word 屹� is mentioned and when a particular gender is debarred then the rest is applicable; and the synonyms of words are demarked from the next by the presence of the word tu or atha.
ś reads in the introductory verses (I. 1. 5; pp. 3-4)�
tvantā'thā''di na pūrvabhāk |
Explaining the above phrase ṣīr峾 remarks letter �tu� indicates a demarcation, while �atha� denotes the beginning of the next set of synonyms.
So saying he cites examples from ś which do not adhere to the rules laid down by itself and hence creates confusion to the readers�
ٲٳ tu śabdo'nte yasya tatvantamathaśabda ādiryasya tadathādi ca ū� na bhajate�āgrimeṇa saṃbadhyata ityartha� | nyāsasiddha� caitat—tunā pūrvasmādviśeṣadyotanāt�āthaśabdena cārthāntarārambhāt yathā��pulomajā śacīndrāṇ� nagarītvamarāvatī� ٲٳ �ԾٲⲹԲᲹⲹٳپś bhara� iti | bhrāntisthanaviṣaya� caitat |
While pointing out the ambiguity, ṣīr峾 also explains reasons for the choice of ś in not using dvandva or 첹śṣa compounds.
He remarks that the dvandva compound is not employed for words in different genders enumerated as synonyms in ś, since in the dvandva compound the gender of the latter word alone is expressed and not of the components as in compound of ܱś, bhidura and 貹��
paravalliṅga� hi syānnāvayavaliṅgam yathā�
ܱś� ܰ� 貹� na tu ܱśbhidurapavaya iti |
So also an 첹śṣa compound is not entertained as the gender of the remaining word alone is reflected�
tathaikaśeṣo na ṛt� śiṣyamāṇaliṅgasyaiva hi īپ� syāt yathā�
Բ� � ś屹ṇo Բ� na tu khaśrāvaṇau nabhasī |