Ancient Indian Education (Brahmanical and Buddhist) c13.10

c13.10

We thus see that Pāṇini was acquainted with a wide range of subjects, religious and secular. He knew the *Ṛigveda* [vi, 3, 55, 133; vii, 4, 39] and refers to its *Pada* [vi, 1, 115; vii, 1, 57; viii, 1, 18, etc.] and *Krama pāṭha* [iv, 2, 61], while the division into Adhyāyas and Anuvākas was also known [v, 2, 60]. He also uses the word *Chhanda* in the sense of Metre [viii, 3, 94]. He knew the *Sāmaveda* [i, 2, 34; iv, 2, 7, and 60; v, 2, 59; etc.]. He knew also of a Yajurveda [ii, 4, 4; iv, 2, 60; v, 4, 77; vi, 1, 117; vii, 4, 38; viii, 3, 104; etc.]. All the three Vedas are referred to in one Sūtra [iv, 3, 129] together with the Schools or Charaṇas based thereon. The *Śākala Śākhā* of the Rigveda is also referred to [ib., 128]. Regarding his knowledge of the *Atharvaveda*, there is no positive evidence as the word occurs only in the Gaṇas to the Sūtras or in the Vārttikas [see iv, 2, 38 and 63; iv, 3, 133; etc.]. Nor do we know definitely whether the White Yajurveda was known to him, because it was left to a Vārttika [to iv, 3, 105] to refer to its author Yājñavalkya as a comparatively later Ṛishi (probably a contemporary of Pāṇini, as I interpret the Vārttika) than those contemplated in the said Sūtra. It is also uncertain whether Pāṇini knew the *Āraṇyakas* on account of his rather significant omission to refer to that meaning in explaining the formation, *Āraṇyaka* [iv, 2, 129]. The omission was left to be supplied by Kātyāyana. On this supposition the *Upanishads*, as we have them now, were not probably known to him because these were developed out of the *Āraṇyakas*. Pāṇini mentions the word *Upanishad* only once and that probably in the sense of a secret [i, 4, 79] (though the *Bālamanoramā* takes it to mean the literary work, *Vedāntabhāga*), but the word occurs twice in the Gaṇas [iv, 3, 73 (in the sense of a literary work) and iv, 4, 12]. There is, however, no doubt that he knew of the *Brāhmaṇas* [ii, 3, 60] and *Kalpa* works and also of *Sūtras* [iv, 2, 65] (which are interpreted to mean grammatical Sūtras by Kātyāyana and Patañjali). He definitely mentions *Brāhmaṇa* works of thirty and forty *adhyāyas* or chapters [v, 1, 162]. Lastly, he refers to works which are similar to the *Brāhmaṇas* and called *Anu-Brāhmaṇas* [iv, 2, 63], while there was something like the Indexing of the Mantras for convenient reference at the time of sacrificial performances [iv, 4, 125-7] by different classes of priests which are also known to Pāṇini [v, 1, 135 and 136].