India as Known to Panini: A Study of the Cultural Material in the Ashtadhyayi c6.15

c6.15

There is unfortunately a tradition current in India, reinforced by legends that Kātyāyana was a biased critic of Pāṇini. The opinion is reiterated even by an eminent writer like Śabarasvāmin (*sadvāditvāch-cha Pāṇiner-vachanaṁ pramāṇaṁ, asadvāditvān-na Kātyāyanasya*, *Mīmāṁsā-Bhāshya*, X.8.1). Prof. Kielhorn who set forth the true position of Kātyāyana in relation to Pāṇini, has shown that it would be a scientific mistake to stigmatize Kātyāyana as an unfair antagonist of Pāṇini, since the object which Kātyāyana and Patañjali have in view throughout their works is one and the same, the nature of their remarks being identical, but only differing in form (Kielhorn, *Kātyāyana and Patañjali*, p. 53). The *Ashṭādhyāyī* instead of being weakened by Kātyāyana shines in his hands with added glory. Kātyāyana gives expression to his admiration for Pāṇini by concluding the *vārttika-sūtras*, in the following devout strain: