1848.] The most ancient Grammar of the Vedas. 1 1 



said to be a celebrated teacher, and author of the commentary to the 

 Praticakhya before us. The writer of the introduction would have found- 

 ed his comment on this commentary, but now he says as above,* that 

 he began svacaktya with a commentary and moreover further on he 

 claims the indulgence of the learned, which he would likely not have 

 done this, had his work been nothing else than an extract (yakshipt&) 

 from a more ancient book. One might therefore conclude that the author 

 of this introduction was Vishnuputra, and that he spoke of himself in 

 the third person, ya chaisha bis sphuta : sakship might then be ex- 

 plained as meaning " condensed." But in this case the passage would 

 contradict the abovementioned ends of Chapters, and the Parshada 

 creshtha, were not in its proper place. I would consequently always prefer 

 and accept the first explanation, that Uvata had in the words "tene- 

 yam, &c." underrated the extent and the value of his labour. In Uva- 

 ta' s commentary we would thus have a work founded on the more ancient 

 explanation of Vishnuputra. Though Uvata himself is more ancient 

 than Mahidhara, the commentator of the V&gasaneyi (Colebr. Ess. I. 

 p. 54, n.) and more ancient than Devaraga, the commentator of the 

 Neighantuka he can yet not be very much earlier since he quotes Pu- 

 ranas in some passages. 



As regards the Sutras themselves, there appears to be no reason 

 why we should not consider them the rules of a Veda school which 

 took its name from Caunaka, of the existence of which we have how- 

 ever no other evidence than the importance of the name in the later 

 tradition of the learned treatment of the Veda, and perhaps also their 

 presence in the compound of Cakala Cunaka (of the gana Karta- 

 kaugapan) where it appears at the same time with the school of 

 Cakalya. The first Praticakhya has repeatedly a particular regard to 

 the doctrines of this latter, and it is imaginable that there was a nearer 

 connection between the scholars of Caunaka and Cakalya. 



The third Praticakhya differs from the two previous ones in a 



most remarkable manner. Among the twenty names of grammarians 



with which he gives authority to his rules, there is not a single one 



which can be found in those two, or even in the Nirukta, while 



the three last mentioned books appear on the whole to have the 



* In the proximity of the modern Compassur near Bhag-alpore (Bumouf Introduc- 

 tion, para. 149, n. Wilson, Varh. Pur. p. 44-3.) 



c 2 



