මුඛමත්තදීපනී.pdf

මුඛමත්තදීපනී හෙවත් කච්චායන වෘත්ති ටීකාව යනු කච්චායන පාලි ව්‍යාකරණයේ සූත්‍ර හා වෘත්ති අර්ථ පැහැදිලි කරමින් විමලබුද්ධි (විමලබෝධි) හිමියන් විසින් රචිත සුප්‍රකට පාලි ව්‍යාකරණ ටීකා ග්‍රන්ථයයි. මෙහි කච්චායන සූත්‍ර, වෘත්ති මෙන්ම මුඛමත්තදීපනී ටීකා පාඨය සම්පූර්ණයෙන් අන්තර්ගත කොට ඇත.

මෙම සංස්කරණය ගාල්ලේ වැලිවිටියේ ශ්‍රී ධම්මරතන නාහිමියන් විසින් සෝදිසි කර සංස්කරණය කරන ලදුව, ලංකාණ්ඩුවේ මුද්‍රණාලයේ (Government Press) 1910 දී (බු.ව. 2454) දෙවන වරට මුද්‍රණය කරවා ඇත. පොත ආරම්භයේ පාලි හා සංස්කෘත භාෂා ඉතිහාසය සහ කච්චායන සම්ප්‍රදාය පිළිබඳව ලියවුණු දීර්ඝ ඉංග්‍රීසි ප්‍රස්තාවනාවක් ද ඇතුළත් වේ.

Dedication

To His Most Gracious Majesty

SOMDETCH PHRA PARAMINDRA MAHA CÚLALANKARA

PHRA CHULA CHOM KLAO,

King of Siam,

PATRON OF PURE BUDDHISM,

IN TOKEN OF HIS MAJESTY’S VISIT TO CEYLON, THIS VOLUME IS, BY SPECIAL ROYAL PERMISSION, DEDICATED

BY

THE EDITOR.

The Editor

INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST EDITION.

WE communicate our thoughts by means of words. Words constitute language. Language is a collection of words used for the expression of our ideas. It is either ව්‍යක්ත (grammatical) or අව්‍යක්ත (colloquial). ව්‍යක්ත language has its forms regulated by grammar, prevails among the learned, and is largely used in metrical composition. Mágadhi, Sanskrit, and Prákrit are ව්‍යක්ත languages. Mágadhi was the language that prevailed in Magadha. Ancient scholars considered it the original language. To quote from the ancients:—

“සා මාගධී මූලභාසා නරා යායාදිකප්පිකා බ්‍රහ්මානො චස්සුතාලාපා සම්බුද්ධා චාපි භාසරෙ.”

The language spoken by the first human beings, Brahmas, Lókóttara (Supreme) Buddhas, and infants who have not heard human speech, was Mágadhi, the original language.

In their poetical compositions Daṇḍi and other great teachers called Sanskrit the divine language: “සංස්කෘතන්නාම දෛවීවා ගන්වාඛ්‍යාතා මහර්ෂිභිඃ.” (“The great Rishis declared Sanskrit to be the language of the gods.”) The following quotations from dramatic works also bear upon the relative importance of these two languages:—

“පුරුෂාණමනීචානාං සංස්කෘතං සංස්කෘතාත්මනාම් ශෞරසෙනී ප්‍රයොක්තව්‍යා තාදෘශීනාඤ්ච යොෂිතාම්. ආසාමෙව තු ගාථාසු මහාරාෂ්ට්‍රීං ප්‍රයොජයෙත් අත්‍රොක්තා මාගධීභාෂා රාජාන්තඃපුරචාරිණාම් චෙටානාං රාජපුත්‍රාණාං ශ්‍රෙෂ්ඨිනාඤ්චාපි මාගධී.”

From this it appears that Sanskrit was the language of the learned, and that Mágadhi was the language of the city and the court, of kings, their deputies, and the royal princes.

According to the learned Daṇḍi, who says “තද්භවස්තත්සමො දෙශීත්‍යනෙකඃ ප්‍රාකෘතක්‍රමඃ,” Prákrit consists of derivatives from Sanskrit, words similar to Sanskrit words, pure native words, &c. This also refers to that language as the noble Prákrit of Maharaṭa. Furthermore, the nature and functions of Sanskrit and Prákrit are described as follows: “සංස්කෘතං සර්ගබන්ධාදි ප්‍රාකෘතං ස්කන්ධකාදිකම්.” Great works in poetry, &c., were composed in Sanskrit, but mere metrical compositions were written in Prákrit.

Again, it is said that some histories were composed both in Sanskrit and Prákrit: “කථා හි සර්වභාෂාභිඃ සංස්කෘතෙන ච බධ්‍යතෙ.” In Védic sciences all languages are reckoned as අපශබ්දා*, Sanskrit alone excepted. It is to be observed that the characteristics of a language are determined by various methods, and that some points of resemblance exist among Sanskrit, Prakrit, and Apabhraṇsa.

Of Oriental languages, there is none so ancient as Mágadhi and Sanskrit. It cannot, however, be definitely stated which of these two is the more ancient. Nevertheless “බ්‍රාහ්මී, බ්‍රහ්මෝක්ති” (i.e., Brahma’s) are both terms for a word, and the opinion of the learned is that the descent of man is from the original Brahmas. Now, since “බ්‍රාහ්මී, බ්‍රහ්මෝක්ති” signify a word; since the language used by the first human beings was the original language; since combinations, declensions, &c., in Védic Sanskrit bear a close affinity to those of Mágadhi; since the kingdom of Magadha can reasonably be supposed more ancient than the other kingdoms; and since the native language of that kingdom was Mágadhi;—it follows that Mágadhi was more ancient than Sanskrit. Mágadhi had two dialects, Déṣiya and Páli. Déṣiya was the colloquial language of Magadha and the neighbouring states prior to the advent of the Buddha; and although the Rishis absorbed in meditation, at that time, held learned converse in that dialect, yet it cannot bear comparison with the dialect in which the Buddha proclaimed the Dharma and his apostles preached his doctrine. The then prevailing dialect of Mágadhi being purged of all its impurities, and being thus rendered perfect, the Dharma was proclaimed in that original language. The term Páli dates its application to the original language from after the first convocation of the five hundred Rahats held in Sattaparni Cave of Rajagaha, under the patronage of King Ajátasattu and presided over by Maha Kásyapa Théra, three months after the Buddha’s attainment of Nirvána. The language neither of Makkhaligósala and other sectarian teachers, nor of Sáta, the ignorant Bhikshu, can bear comparison with Páli. The languages that prevailed in Behar and the adjoining states, two or three centuries after the Buddha’s Parinirvána, bear no comparison with it. Yea, even it is so. The inscriptions on rocks in the Mágadhi language engraved during the great Dharmásóka’s reign bear abundant testimony to this.

Sanskrit, too, consists of two dialects, viz., Védic Sanskrit and Laukika† Sanskrit. Though Védic Sanskrit shows some similarity to Déṣiya dialect of Mágadhi, to Páli, the similarity of either is not so apparent.

Páli and Sanskrit are both languages having grammars of high refinement and minute elaboration. Grammar is the science that teaches the right use of words or language. The chief grammars

* Ungrammatical language. † Laukika: prevailing among mankind.

of the Sanskrit language are four: Pániní, Cándra, Kátantra, and Mugdhabódha. Sáraswata, Siddhántakaumudi, Siddhantacandriká, Ásubódha are also Sanskrit grammars based materially upon Pániní. Out of these grammars, Cándra appears to have been in use among Sinhalese scholars about five centuries ago; for in their works on religion they quote Súttras from it, and explain the etymology of the words; but that original book having been lost, only a summary of it, called Bálávabódha, is now extant.

The important Páli grammars are six, viz., Mahánirutti, Bodhisatta Vyákarana, Sabbagunákara Vyákarana, Kaccáyana, Moggalláyana, and Saddaníti. Of these, the first three have met with the same fate as the Cándra. Rúpasiddhi and Bálávatára are two grammars which treat of etymology much on the same lines as the Kaccáyana, the latter being as remarkable for brevity as the former for clearness. Payógasiddhi, Susaddasiddhi, Padasádhana are treatises on Etymology closely following Moggalláyana. Cúla Sabdaníti, treating, as it does, of the Súttras in the Mahá Sabdaníti may well be considered its sequel.

Sambandha Cintá, Sadda-sárattha-jálini, Kaccáyana-bhéda, Saddattha-bhéda-cintá, Káriká, Kárikávutti, Vibhatyattha, Vácakópa-deṣa, Nayalakkhana Vibháviní, Nirutti-sangaha, Kaccáyana Sára, Vibhatyattha Dípaní, Saṇvannanánaya Dípaní, Vacca Vácaka, Saddavutti, Bálappabódhana, Kaccáyana Dípaní, Gulhattha Dípaní, Mukhamatta Sárá, Sabdabindu, Sadda Kaliká Saddaviniccha, &c., are other grammatical works which have gone upon the lines of the Kaccáyana and Moggalláyana. The commentaries, sub-commentaries, translations, glossaries, &c., of the Páli grammars are too numerous to mention here. All these grammars were written for the express purpose of facilitating the understanding of the inconceivably fine Buddhist doctrines, which are otherwise almost impossible to be understood by persons swayed by worldly passions. And of these grammars there is none so pleasing in style, so clearly understood, so readily committed to memory, so excellent in arrangement, so highly recognized as an authority by grammarians as this Kaccáyana. It is, in short, the mainstay of the Páli language. Although it does not explain the formation of certain words in Páli, it is unquestionably the most exhaustive and ancient Páli grammar extant. It begins with a Súttra on the use of letters. The realization of the importance of an undertaking at its very commencement undoubtedly lends encouragement to its successful completion. The author of the Kaccáyana, in the same way, animates the student by a representation at the commencement of the advantages to be gained by a proper study of letters. It is, however, for this very reason, strange though it may seem, that some teachers exclude that Súttra from the list of Súttras properly so called. Others lay it down as the introductory Súttra. But Sarvavarma, the author of Kátantra, introduces his Súttras with

“සිද්ධො වර්ණසමාම්නායඃ.” Similarly it may be inferred that “අථො අක්ඛරසමාඛ්‍යා” is the introductory Súttra premising the utility and scope of the subject.

With commendable unselfishness the author of the Kaccáyana, having treated of orthography in his own way, recommends, wherever useful, other grammarians’ treatment of it; for, says he, “පරසමඤ්ඤා පයොගෙ;” but takes particular care not to mention by name any special books as being preferable; nevertheless, a careful examination of the various grammars cannot fail to discover the author’s predilection for the Kátantra. Indeed, the points of similarity between the Kaccáyana and Kátantra are so very numerous as to lead to the inevitable conclusion that the former was based mainly upon the latter.

It was the opinion of the commentators and sub-commentators of the Kaccáyana that its author was the great Kaccáyana honoured by the Buddha with the designation of Etadagga, and reckoned among his eighty great apostles. But it should be remembered that his Holiness was one of the great Rahats, one who had attained to the four Paṭisambhidas, or analytical sciences (attha, dhamma, nirutti, and paṭibhána), and who was therefore pre-eminently qualified to explain and illustrate the pithy doctrines preached by the Buddha. But the book under review containing no Súttras for the formation of certain words in the Buddhist scriptures, must be considered, in some respects, deficient. Hence it is argued that, were this the work of the great Rahat (Kaccáyana), its sole object being the elucidation of the language in which the Buddha’s doctrines are embodied, such deficiencies could not exist. And therefore it is only reasonable to suppose that the venerable author of the Kaccáyana grammar was not the identical great Rahat Kaccáyana, but another great scholar who lived at some subsequent time and bore the same name, and combined profound knowledge of the Tripiṭakas, and a clear insight into the Dharma, with no inconsiderable attainments in Sanskrit, logic, grammar, &c. References to this author made in the other ancient Páli grammars put it beyond a doubt that this noble work belongs to a period anterior to them all; but the exact date cannot, however, now be determined.

The Pániní grammar in its complete state was the joint production of the three Rishis, Pánini, Vararuci, and Patañjali, who respectively contributed the Súttra (සූත්‍ර), Vritti (වෘත්ති), and Ṭíká (ටීකා), and was accordingly styled the Trimuni (the three authors’) grammar. The Kátantra grammar was, likewise, the result of the joint labours of the distinguished scholars Sarvavarma, Durgasiṇha, and Trilócanadása, who respectively attended to the same three departments of the grammar. It is in the same way that the Kaccáyana was brought to perfection, Kaccáyana himself writing the Súttras, Sanghanandi the Vritti (meaning in general), and Vimalabódhi the Ṭíká (Commentary). Further, the Scholiast remarks, “සූත්තෙන