175. DHVANYĀLOKA 173

DHVANYĀLOKA 173

'sūtreşveva hi tatsarvam yadvrttau yacca vārtike' (on Jaimini II. 3 16). The following quotation explains in what cases it is the duty of the afdar to make additions and in what cases he should avoid saying that words have to be understood in the H.1 That quotation makes it clear that whatever is necessary for helping the pupil or reader to understand the subject may be done by the वृत्तिकार. All that was meant by the fact of 'utsūtravyakhyana' not being allowed was that, as long as possible, a commentator should not put forward words as being understood in a sūtra. But otherwise the commentator was free to say that the sutra is not clear and that it does not mention the subject of discussion (as Sabara does on Jaimini II. 3. 16 विशये प्रायदर्शनात्) or to say that the sutrakara held a certain view ignoring a certain Upanisad passage (as done by Śankara on Vedāntasūtra III. 4. 18). Even the merest tyro can see that every bhasya or vrtti adds vastly to what the plain meaning of the sutra is and introduces topics far beyond what the sutra expresses or implies. To take one glaring example, the sutra 'अंशो नानाव्यपदेशात्' (वेदान्तसूत्र II. 3.43) is explained by Śankarācārya as ₹ ; while several other commentators take the sutra as it is without adding any word and criticize Sankarācārya for the result of his taking such liberties in order to make the meaning of the sutra square with his philosophy of the Absolute. Dr. Pandey in his work on 'Abhinava' p. 1. सूत्रेष्वेव हि सत्सर्वं (तत्सर्वं ?) यद्वृत्तौ यच्च वार्तिके। सुत्रं योनिरिद्दार्थानां सर्वं सूत्रे प्रतिष्ठितम्।। इति ये वदन्ति तान्प्रत्युच्यते। न किंचित्साधनमप्रदर्शित- विषयं स्वार्थ साधयति। सूत्रकारेण चेह हेतुमात्रमुपात्तम्। न चार्थप्रकरणादिभि- रप्युदाहरणप्रतिशासंशयहेतूनामन्यतमसुपलभ्यते। तस्मादगमके सूत्रे सति अवश्यं दोष- प्रतिसमाधानार्थ वृत्तिकारादिभियतितव्यम्। सत्येव सम्भवेऽध्याहारादिवजनमुक्तम्। सर्वथा शिष्यप्रज्ञासंस्कारे सूत्रकारादीनां प्रवर्तमानानां येनेव तवनुगुणं यत्कृतं तदेव ग्रहोतव्यं नासवुग्रहः कर्तव्यः। इदं सूत्रकारेण नोपात्तमिदं वृत्तिकारेणैतत्प्रदर्श- नार्थमेतद्वर्णयन्ति ।. Dr. Mookerjee (B.C.Law vol. I at p. 180) merely refers to Nagesa quoting the first half of the kārikā cited above in this note. He should have gone to the Tantravartika where this is quoted not as Kumārila's own view but of others, which he rejects. The न्यायसुधा (p. 932 of Ch.S. Series) explains the words सवथा शिष्य ... नासद्ग्रहः कर्तव्यः as follows: भाष्यं व्याचष्टे सवथेति। युक्तिगम्येडर्थे पुरुषविशेषस्यानादरखीयत्वायुक्तियुक्तं यद्वृत्तिकाराविभि- रुकतं तत्सूत्रकारानुपात्तत्वान्न ग्राह्यमित्यसदाग्रहो न कार्य इत्याशयः।'