James De Alwis.

A descriptive catalogue of Sanskrit, Pali, & Sinhalese literary works of Ceylon online

. (page 6 of 17)
Online LibraryJames De AlwisA descriptive catalogue of Sanskrit, Pali, & Sinhalese literary works of Ceylon → online text (page 6 of 17)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

Sutta Niddesa {see ante, p. 47) that he "composed the
Kachchdi/ana-pakarana, consisting of (the Suttans)
attho ahkliara Sahudto etc.'"

Hence it is quite clear, tliat upon the recent
researches to which I have adverted, Kachchayana



can only be looked upon as the author of the Suttas.
This too appears to be very doubtful, according to the
new lights which have been thrown upon this investi-
gation, and to which I shall now proceed to advert.

1. A close and careful study of the oldest works
on Buddhism has satisfied me of the correctness of my
Pandit's remark, that the existence of the introductory
stanzas in the Vasantatilaka metre justifies us to place
this Grammar at a period long subsequent to the age of
S^riputta Maha Kachchayana. It may be confidently
asserted, that there are no such metres in the text
books of Buddhism. An examination of all the poetic
portions of the Pitakattaya thoroughly establishes
the fact, that at the time it came into existence, no such
Sanskrit metres were known. See }wst, under the head
of Tepitaka. But it is suggested, that " though in point
of fact tlie prefatory stanzas have been introduced by
the compiler, yet the Suttas might have been, accord-
ing to tradition, the work of Kachchayana," Neither
does this appear to have been the case; for the Mukha-
mattadipani, the oldest comment on this Grammar,
refers to the words of the introductory stanzas as the
very words of the Grammarian.

I must not omit to state that Stiriputta Maha Kach-
chayana is also mentioned in a Burman work called
the Midamule, as the author of a Pali Grammar. The
Rev. Francis Mason, in an article in the American
Oriental Journal, vol, iv. p. 107, writes: "The Mula-
mule opens with the statement that, when Gautama,
soon after he attained the Buddhahood, preached to


his followers in Pali, they found it difficult to under-
stand him; but one of them, the great Kachchayana,
prepared a Pali Grammar, which enabled them to un-
derstand his language with facility."

This tradition is substantially the same that is
current in Ceylon; and the fact here stated renders no
assistance Avhatevcr in the investi2;ation before us ;
since the mere existence of Kachchay ana's Grammar
in Burma proves nothing. The best available evidence
as to the introduction of Pali books and character into
that country points at Ceylon; and the earliest period
at which the same were taken to Pegu from Ceylon,
was, according to the statement of P. Garpanus, on the
authority of a Burman History called the Maharazoen,
by Buddhagosa in the 940th year of their era, answer-
ing to 307, A. D.* This, according to the authentic
chronology of the Mahawansa, could not have been
earlier than 432 A. D. Be that however as it may.
We have clear evidence, as we shall hereafter shew,
that Buddhagosa did not see Kachchay ana's Grammar;
and it is thence clear that the work of Kachchayana,
like the tradition as to its authorship, has been carried
from Ceylon to Burma.

Allowino; our conclusions to be thus far correct,
there is indeed another view of the whole question.
It is this — that, though, as we have already seen,
the Grammar which goes by the designation of Kach-
chdyana's Pali Grammar, and which is also extant in

* See Essai sur le Pali, by Burnouf and Lassen, p. G2.


Burma, Avas not entirely the work of Sariputta Maha
Kachehayana, yet there is nothing in the evidence
which we have examined to preclude, but many things
to warrant, the belief — that a Grammar in point of fact
was composed by him, and that it is either now entirely
lost; or, having been partially deranged, was at a
subsequent date reproduced by some one with the aid
of Piinini and other Sanskrit Grammars, by adopting
their terminology.

Indeed I have already shewn* that some of the
technical terms adopted in Kachchayana were bor-
rowed from Sanskrit writers.

Book \. Caf. 1. § 9.

Paea SAMAnfiA' TAYOGE. Vutti — Ya cha pana
Sakkata gandhesu Samanna gliosa ti va aghosa ti va ta
payoge sati ettlia'pi yujjante. ' In composition other's
terminology. Vutti — Such (grammatical) terms as
are called ghosa (Sonants) or aghosa (Surds) in
Sanskrit gandhas (or literary Avorks) are here adopted
as exigency may require.'

I have also shewn that though some of the aphorisms
in Kachchayana, like portions of its terminology,
were the same in Panini, yet others greatly differed;
e.g. Panchami and Sattami, for the 'Benedictive'
and 'Potential' Moods, were not found as a 'fifth'
and •seventh' division of the Verb in any Grammar
that I have examined. The Balavatara explains —

* See Introduction to Kaclicli£iyana, pp. xxv. et xl.

kachcha'yana pa'li grammar. 61

Pancliami Sattami tyayan pubbachariya safinti — that
'Panchami and Sattami were the terminology of former
teachers;' and the Maha Sadda-niti states that those
terms Avere in accordance with Sanskrit Grammars
such as the Katantra.

I have not however had the good fortune of
consultiniT the work to which reference is here made.
M. Kuhn, who has only had the benefit of examining
a few fragments which Theodore Aufrecht published
of the doctrine of the Katantrics in his Catalogue of
Sanskrit works in the Bodleian Librarv No. 374, has
the following observations appended to his translation
of Kachchayana's section on Karaka, which has just*
been received in Ceylon: —

" It is not surprising that D'Alwis, p. xli., was excited
at such agreement with the opinion that Panini was
before the eyes of Kachchayana while composing his
work. He grants, however, that this agreement may
be explained too, in anotlier way. And, indeed by a
certain grammarian of the Pali language, I mean the
author of the Grammar Maliasaddaniti, in D'Alwis's
work, p. xl.j we are referred to the Katantric School,
for the terms used by Kachchayana, which were 'in
accordance vvith Sanskrit Grammars such as the
Katantra.' Weber in his Review of D'Alwis's book,
p. 564., lias justly observed, that D'Alwis has in-
correctly rejected this assertion . His words are : ' This
passing remark of a scholiast can but seem to us as a

* April, 1870.


plain and simple statement, and altliough we need not
naturally take it np for present use as ready money,
it may nevertheless serve at all events as a welcome
support for future investigations.'

" And, in fact, that this opinion is not plahily alien
from the truth, appears most perspicuously from those
few fragments, which Theodore Aufrecht published,
of the doctrine of the Katantrics, in his Catalogue of
Sanskrit works in the Bodleian Library, No. 374.
For the prefaces of both Avorks (D'Alwis p. xvii.,
Weber, in the place already cited, p. 657. — Aufrecht
p. 168) and the rules that are read in the beginning of
every book alike exhibit a certain likeness. These
are the rules :

Kat. Aufr. p. 169. Samiis. 1. namnum samaso yuktartah.

Samas. 2. taststha lopya vibaktayah.

Taddh. 1. vann apatye.

A'kliy. 1. atha parasmaipadaai.

A'khy. 2. nav^ paraiiy atmanepade.

A'khy. 3. trini trini prathamamadbyamottamali.

Kacc. Samas. 1 . namauam samaso yuttattho.

Samas. 2. tesam vibhattiyo lopa ca.

Taddh. 1. van apacce.

Akhy. ]. atha pubbani vibhattinam cha parassapadaui.

Akhy. 2. parany attanopadani.

Akhy. 3. dve dve pathamamajjimuttamapurisa.

" Now, though these rules, which are similar to each
other, of the Katantrics and of Kachchaj^ana, differ
greatly from the rules of Panini and his followers.


yet Katantru Nam 1. Dbatuvibhaktlvarjam arthaval
lingam (compare Pan. 1, 2, 45 : arthavad adliatur
apratyayah pratipadikam) is of almost greater import-
ance ; whence it is evidently perceptible that, amongst
the Katantrics and in Kachchaj^ana's Grammar, the
word lingahad the same signification, namely the notion
of a nominal theme (see what we have discussed above
on the rule Karak. 15.) That even Vopadeva had
the same notion of the word linga before his eyes, in
forming the noun of the theme li, is handed down to
us by the scholiast on Vopad. 1, 12; but Vopadeva
made use of many books belonging to the Grammar
of the Katantrics. (Westergaard. Radices proef.
p. iv.) Finally, it seems proper to remark, that in
Durgasinha's commentary to the Katantric Grammar,
(in the place already cited, p. 369,) the arrangement of
the krit suffixes is attributed to one Kachchayana.

Vriksliadivad ami riKlhali Kritinalamkritiih kritali
Katyayaneua te srishtah vibuddhipratibuddhaye.*

"The Katantric Grammar 'docs not labour under
the studied brevity and obscurity of Panini and his
school,' and when the great number of its appendices
(pari9ishta) is considered, you will scarcely doubt of its
being composed for the use of beginners. Excellently
therefore do tlie perspicuity and the method of

* Colebrooke names a certain Yararuclii also anu)ng.st the coiu-
mentators of the Katantric Grammars, misc. ess. ii, 45. Weber
Zeitschr. d. dentschen morn;cnl. (jesellschaffc viii. 851.


Kachcluvyaua's work agree with that Grammar, giving
a sketch only and being less ample ; points in which
the 3rcl book also departs widely from Panini's Gram-
mar ; and, if the author has followed the Katantrics,
he could have also drawn from their compendium
those articles which are common to Panini and himself;
and assuredly the Katantrics have, by no means, re-
jected the method of the Paninians in the exposition
of the unadi particles. However this may be, it is
already apparent that Kachchayana's work has the
semblance of a very great affinity with the Katantric


" It is quite evident that there are, in this third book,
two kinds of examples which are drawn from Brahma-
datta. And the first kind is that which is mostly
used* in Sanskrit Grammars, such as the commentary
to Kac. 2 : himavata pabhavanti pafica mahanadiyo,
and the scholium to Pan. I, 4, .'^1 : himavato ganga
prabhavati. Kach. 3 : yava patisedhenti gavo, and
Pan. I 4, 27, yavebhyo gam varayati. Kach. 4,
upajjhaya antaradayati sisso ; and Pan. I, 4, 28,
upadhyayad antai'dhatte. Kach. 5, satasma bandho
naro; and Pan. II, 3, 24, catad baddhah. The proper
names devadatta and yajiiadatta are set by each other
in the same manner. Kach. 6 and Pan. I, 4, 52, 55.

* It will do to cite the Scholia to Pi'inini's work. It is well known
that the learneu men who in the beginning of the present century
commented at Calcutta, on Panini's Sutra, drew from more ancient
sources. Many examples are found also in Siddhautakauni.

kaciiciia'yana pa'li grammae. 65

Kach. 7 alam mallo mallassa, and Pan. II, 3, IG, alam
mallo mallaya. Kach. 8, tilesu telam, and Pan. I, 4, 45,
tilesliu tailam (see wtiat was expounded above con-
cerning akase sakuna yanti) Kach. 8, gangayani ghoso,
and Pan. I, 4, 42, gangayam ghoshah. Kach. 9, datena
lunati, and Pan. I, 4, 42, II, 'A, 18 datrena lunati.
Kach. 14, karasapatiya bhunjati, and Pan. II, 3, 64:
dvih kamsapatryam bhunkte, Kach. 20, kena hetuna
vasati, and Pan. II, 3, 26, annasya hetor vasati Kach.
25, sotthi pajanam, and Pan. 2, 3, 16, svasti prajabhyah,
Kach. 28, Katam karoti, and Pan. I, 4, 49, II, 3, 2,
the same. Kach. 29, masamadhite, and Pan. II, 3, 5,
the same. The examples Avhich are adduced from the
scholia to jPan. I. 4, 52, appear to have been of some
little authority even in the text of Kachchay ana's
31st Rule; compare 91 9ayayati, and si sayati; adhi-i
adhyapayati and the synonym path pathayati. Kah.
34, gonanam sami, gonesu sami &c., and Pan. II, 3, 39,
gavam svarai, goshu svami. Kach. 35, kanha gavinam
(gavisu) sampannakkhiratama and Pan. II, 3, 41,
gavam (goshu) krishna bahukshira. Kach. 36, rudato
darakassa (rudantasmin darake) pabbaji, and Pan. II,
3, 38, rudatah (rudati) pravrajit. Kach. 41,dipi cam-
mesu hannate, kuhjaro dantesu hahiiate, and the Vartt.
to Pan. II, 3, 36, carmani dvipinam hanti, dantayor
hanti kuujaram. Kach. 44, gosu duyhamanesu gato,
duddhasu agato and Pan. II, 3, 37, goshu duhyamiinesu
gatah, dugdhasv agatah, Kach, 44, upa nikkhe kalia-
panam, and Pan. I, 4, 87, upa nishke karshapanam.



Kach. 44, adhi Bralimadatte pancala, and Pan. I, 4,
97, II, 3, 9 adlii Brahmadatte pancalah.

" The second kind of examples is what are added by
the author, who was devoted to Buddha's doctrine, from
the sacred books, as comment to Kach. 7, saggassa
gamanena va from the Dhamapa. str. 178. Kach. 17,
manasa ce padutthena, and manasa ce pasannena from
Dhammap, str. 1 and 2. Kach. 26, papa cittam nivaraye
from Dliaramap, str. 116. abbha mutto va candima
from Dhammap. 172, 382 Kach. 33, papasmim ramati
mano from Dhammap str. 116, Kach. 40, sabbe tasauti
dandassa, sabbe bhayanti maccuno from Dhammap,
str. 129 &c., &c.

" I have been able to use only a single copy, in order
to learn the constitution of the entire text, namely a
copy written with a style in the writing of " Cambodia,"
and supplied with emendations added by another hand.
I have collated another copy concerning the siitras,
containing all the sutras of Kachchayana. The former
copy is most negligently written with respect to ortho-
graphy, so that I judged it unnecessary to notice
a variation merely orthographical ; but in this still very
doubtful matter I have mostly followed Fausboll."*

Coincidences like the above lead yer se to no import-
ant results as to the age of Kachchayana ; yet they
are, when taken with other circumstances, not without

* Translated from "Specimen of Kachchayana" bj Ernestus
Kuhn, pp. 19—22.

kachcha''yana vx'li grammar. 67

value as exhibiting, if notliing farther, than, as Kuhn
says, '■' a semblance of a very great affinity between
Kachchay ana's work and the Katautric Grammars."
Failing in all my endeavours to fix the age of the
work under notice, I have resorted to the only practi-
cable mode, suggested by Professor H. H. Wilson,
of examining w^hat I may call positive and negative
evidence furnished by subsequent writers.* Anxious,
therefore to find out the oldest book which refers to
Kachchayana or his terminology, I was, in the course
of my investigations, naturally led to an examination
of Buddhao-osa's Atthakatha : and I am olad to sav
my trouble has not been altogether fruitless. Indeed
it has led to one important result, viz., to shake the
confidence which I had previously placed on Tradition,
and to establish the fact, that the work under notice
was not known to the Sinhalese between the a^e of

o O

Buclclhag-osa and that of the Tikas to the Atthakatha.
Now, if this Grammar was written by the eminent
disciple of Buddha, to whom it is attributed by tradi-
tion, it is very reasonable to believe that it, like the
Pali language, found its way into Ceylon soon after
the introduction of Buddhism into it, and upon" the
arrival of Mahiuda. In that case, too, Buddhagosa

* " The comparative age of various compositions is in many
cases ascertainable by the references which the writers make to
their predecessors ; and the absence of the notice of a celebrated
work where mention of it is likely to be found, is a very strong
presumption of its not being in existence." — Prof nee lo the Sans-
krit Dictionary^ p. xxv.


must liave tbund it here on his arrival, if indeed he
had not been ah-eady familiar with it; and nothing
is more reasonable than to find that in his comments
on the Pitakattaya — especially when we consider that
he had to translate from the Sinhalese into the very
lanffuao'e from which the Sinhalese version itself was
produced,— he had, in the interpretation of terms,
referred to the very personage whom Buddha had
so much complimented, or had frequently quoted or
alluded to his Grammar, or, at least, had adopted the
technical terms given in his Grammar. Such would
have also been precisely the result, though Mahinda
had not brought the work into Ceylon, yet, if it was
the work of Maha Kachchayana in India. But it is
strange to find, that, far from any allusion being made
to the author of this Grammar, and far from the
Grammar itself being in any way cited, there is not
even au agreement between the terminology of
Buddhagosa and Kachchayana.

Some of the terms used by the former are thus
collected in the following stanza, which we quote from

Pachchatta' mupa yo gancha

Karanan Sampadauiyan

Nissakka Stirni vachanan

And they may be thus tabularized : —

Buddhagosa. Kachchayana. Sinhalese.* Signification.

Pachchattau ... Pathama ... Pera ... Nominative.
* See Sidatsangara, § 26, ei seq.

kachcha'yana pa'li grammar.





. . Tatiya


I Katu
'" \ Karana*...





Sarapadana .

. . Chatutthi

Sapadan . .



. . Panchami

. . Avadi . . .



. . Chhatthi

Sabanda. . .




. . . Adara . . .




. . . Alap


So reasonable is the inference which we drew before,
" that if Kachchdyana was pre-Buddhagosic, that he
would have adopted his terminology," — that we find
in the iLtkas, or 'paraphrases' to the Atthakatha, not
only the terminology of Kachchayana, but that of
Buddhagosa — indicating, as cleai'ly as any matter of
this kind can be shewn, that this Grammar came into
existence betv/een the age of the Atthakatlia and that
of the Tz7«i5.

To this it is no argument to say, that it is possible
that Buddhagosa simply translated into the Pali the
words adopted in the Sinhalese Atthakatha, as the
words Karana, Sampadana, and A'lapana clearly shew
their ao-reement with the Sinhalese Grammatical terms
Karana, Sapadan, and Alap for the same cases; for,
if a portion of the terminology of Buddhagosa was
that which Mahinda's Sinhalese version contained,

* The Sinhalese divide the Karanan into two, the instnimental
(Katu) and the auxiliary (Karana). See Sidatsangara, p. 30,
note (f).


and therefore the terminology of the Sinhalese Attha-
katha, originally made at the first dawn of Buddhism,
it is inexplicable, on the supposition that this Grammar
was by Sariputta, that Buddhagosa did not, in some
parts at least of his Translation, adopt the terminology
of the eminent disciple of Buddha, but departed so
widely from it as to employ the technical terms of
Sanskrit Grammarians.


Another work which is ascribed to Sariputta Maha
Kachchayana is the one above indicated. From an
examination of its style it would seem to be the work
of a person different from the author of the Grammar ;
but the difference of the subjects, and therefore of
their treatment, might have led to the difference of
style as already pointed out by me elsewhere.* It
is, what it professes to be, a very full and complete
commentary on the Texts of Buddhism. It combines
a Commentary with a Dictionary. It quotes ]iassages
said to have been uttered by Buddha himself. The
metres of the Gathas are clearly Prakrit, And, from
the interpolations of certain notes, which make refer-
ence to some of the distinguished members of the
Buddhist Convocations, and which are also to be found
in all the MSS. Avhich I have consulted, I am the more
inclined to the belief, that this '^ extensive dogmatical

* See Introduction to Kacbchayana, p. xxiii.


and exegetical commentary on a metrical text containing
questions and answers, diffuse and prolix, as is the case
in works of this kind,"* was written by Maha Kach-
chayana. Professor Weber adds in a note — "It is
probably on account of this text that the whole work
has been ascribed to Sariputta, and it is indeed just
possible that at least part of the text may be by him.
For it appears from king Asoka's letter to the Bhabra
Convocation, that even at that period the question of
Upatissa (upatisapasina) i e., of Sariputra, formed part
of the sacred texts. — See ' Indische Studien,' iii. 172."

The book from which the following specimen is
extracted contains 108 olas; each two feet long, with
nine lines written on each page.

Tattha katarao vichayoharo? ' yan puchchhitancha
vissajjitancha' adi gatha. Ayan vichayoharo kin
vichinati ? Padan vichinati, pafihan vichinati, vissajja-
nan vichinati, pubbaparan vichinati, assadan vichinati,
adinavan vichinati, nissaranan vichinati, phalan vichi-
nati, upayan vichinati, anattin vichinati, anugitin
vichinati, sabbe nava suttante vichinati. Yatha kin
bhave? Yathd, ayasma Ajito Parayane bhagavantan
pafihan puchchhati —

"Keuassu nivuto loko [ichcba yasma Ajito]f
Kenassu nappakasati
Kissabhilepanau briisi
Kinsutassa mahabbhayau..." ti

* Weber's Review of Alwis' Introduction to Kachcliayana, p. 29.
"j" This passage witliin brackets is stated by the commentator
to hare been interpolated in one of the Buddhist Convocations.


Imani cliattari padani piichchhi tani. Soclia kho
eko pafihoj kasma? eka vatthupariggaho, Evanhi aha
— ' kenassunivutoloko'-ti — lokadliitthanan piichclihati:
'kenassu nappakasati' ti — lokassa appakasanan puch-
chliati: 'kissablu lepananbrusi'ti — lokassa abhilepanan
puclichhati : 'kiiisutassa mahabbhayan'ti — tasseva
lokassa mahabbhayan puchchliati. Loko tividho, —
kilesa loko, bhava loko, indriya loko. Tattha vissajjana

" Avijja [ya] nivuto loko [Ajitati bliagava]
Vivichchha* nappakasati
Jappabhi lepanan brumi
Dukkham'assa mahabbhayan..." ti

Imani cliattari padani imehi chatuhi padehi vissajji-
tani — Pathanian pathauiena, dutiyan dutiyena, tatiyan
tatiyena, chatutthan chatutthena.

* Kenassu nivuto loko'ti — panbe ' avijja nivuto
loko'ti — vissajjana. Nivaranenahi nivuto loko, avijja-
nivaranahi sabbe satta yatbaha bbagava. '*' Sabba
satlanan bhikkhave sabba pananan sabba bhutanan
pariyayato ekam'eva nivaranan vadami, yadidan —
avijja ; avijjanivarana-hi sabbe satta, sabbaso cha
bhikkhave avijjaya nirodha chagii patinissagga, natthi
sattanan nivaranan ti vadami" — tenacha pathamassa
padassa vissajjana yutta.

'Kenassu nappakasati'ti — pahhc vivichchha,f nappa-
kasati'ti vissajjana; yo puggalo nivaranehi nivuto so

* After this word, I find "pamada." It is, I believe, the inter-
poUition (jf a note.

I " Taniada " also occurs here.


viviclichhati, viviclichhdnama vuchchati viclilkichchha
— So vichikichchhanto nabhi saddahati, anabhisadda-
hanto viriyan narabhati akusald;nan dhammanan paha-
naya kusalanan dhammanan sachchhi kiriyaya, so idha
paraada'raanuyutto viharati; pamatto sukke dhamme
na upadiyati; tassa te anupadiyamana nappakasanli —
yatha'ha bhagava —

"Dure santo pakasenti
Himavanto va pabbato ;
Asantettha na dissanti
Eatti khitta yathd sara ;
Te gunehi pakasenti
Kittiya cha yasena cha"...ti.

Tena cha dutiya padassa vissajjana yutta.

Kiss'abhi lepanan brusi'-ti panhe ' japp'abhi lepanan
brumi'...ti vissajjana; jappanama vuchcha-ti tanba ; sa
kathan abhilirapati yatha'ha bhagava —

"Ratio atthan na ja nati
Ratto dhamman na passati ;
Andhan taman tada hoti
Yan rago saliate naran"...ti

Sa'yan tanha asattibahulassa puggalassa evan abhl-
jappati karitva; tattha loko abhilitto nama bhavati —
tena cha tatlyassa padassa vissajjana yutta.

* Kinsu tassa mahabbhayan'ti panhe ' dukkham'asea
mahabbhayan'ti vissajjana. Duvidhan dukkhan kayi-
kan cha chetasikan cha, yan kayikan idan dukkhan,
yan chetasikan idan domanassan, sabbe satta hi duk-
khassa ubbijjanti, natthi bhayan dukkhena sama saman
kuto va pana tassa uttaritaran. Tisso dkkhata —



dukkha-dluikkhata, vipari nama dukkhatii saukh^ra
dukkha-ta ti, tattha loko odhiso kadachi karahachi
dukkha dukkhataya muclicliati, tath^ vipai'inaraa duk-
kataya; tan kissa hetu iionti loke appabadhd'pi
digh^yukd'pi. Sankhara dukkha taya pana loko
anupadisesaya nibbanadhatuya miiclicbati, tasma sank-
bara dukkhata dukkhan lokassa tikatva 'dukkham'assa
mahabbbayan'ti — tenacha chatutthassa padassa vissaj-
jana yutta. Tena'ba bhagava 'avijja nivuto loko...'ti.
'Of the foregoing what is vichayaharo? [See] the
gdthd — ' Yan puchchhitan cha vissjjitan cha' etc. What
does this vichayaharo investigate ? It investigates
partsof speech [words]. It investigates questions. It
investigates answers. It investigates what precedes,
and follows [the context]. It investigates happy

1 2 3 4 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Online LibraryJames De AlwisA descriptive catalogue of Sanskrit, Pali, & Sinhalese literary works of Ceylon → online text (page 6 of 17)