Page:Systems-of-Sanskrit-Grammar-SK Belvalkar.pdf/80

72 Systems of Sanskrit Grammar § 55- no other than the Nyasa by Prabhachandracharya, which is in the nature of a commentary on the Amoghavritti.' And ii. a commentary called Chintamani by Yakshavar- man. This was throughout based upon the Amoghavritti and lays no claim to originality. Nevertheless it has been honoured by many sub-commentaries such as the Mani- prakāśikā by Ajitasenacharya, Chintamanipratipada by Mangarasa, and a Tippani by Samantabhadra. Besides regular commentaries there have been pro- duced at least two or three recasts of the Sakaṭāyana grammar. The best of them is the Prakriyäsangraha by Abhayachandracharya, published at Kolhapur, 1907. Abhayachandra's date follows from that of his pupil Kesavavarni who in Saka 1281 (A. D. 1359) wrote a Sanskrit commentary on Gomatasara, a philosophical work in Prakrit. Abhayachandra thus flourished during the first half of the fourteenth century. In his recast Abhayachandra has omitted a large number of the origi- nal sūtras, which were unnecessary in a work for begin- ners, and amplified a few others. His arrangement is closely modelled upon works like the Prakriyakaumudi. Another and a still shorter abridgment of the Sakata- yana grammar is the Rupasiddhi by Dayāpāla, pupil of Matisagara and a fellow-student of Vadiraja alias Jaya- simha II, the Chalukya emperor who was reigning in Saka 947 (A. D. 1025). The work is somewhat similar in scope to the Laghuka umudi. 1 Regarding the Amoghavritti, Sakatayana's own commentary on his sutras, see Professor Pathak's paper (Ind. Ant. for October 1914). 2 Compare-et- varnir gyfen. a Extracts to prove the dependence of this commentary on the Amogha- vritti are given by Professor Pathak, loc. cit. 3 For these facts I an indebted to Professor Pathak's paper in the Ind. Ant, for Oct. 1914,