arrangement. Hence we find
R„vana
Siddhar Calling his work Akarƒtinika–—u and
not Akarƒti merely. We
have already noted (vide infra foot-note2, p.xxvi) that at first the term
uri-c-col and later the trem nika–—u
were used to designate work of this kind. |
PAL-PORUT-COLA-MANI |
An improvement on the plan adopted in the adove nika--u
was made in Pal-porut-c‡˜ƒma-i1, written in
1700 A.D. Its author was …šwara
Bhƒrarti,son of a certain
Chidambara Bhƒrarti of Madacai. As
one of his prefatory stanzas pays homage to the God at Tinnevelly, this
Madacai must be somewhere in its neighborhood. The author expressly
states that, following Amarak†ša, he divides his work into three sections. In the
manuscript available, the third section is not found. The first section
deals with words having one meaning each, the second with homonyms, and
the third with group-names. It will at once be seen that the
classification adopted is somewhat simpler. While many sections must be
examined before a word is found in Akarƒti-nika--u,it is enough to
look through two sections in pal-poru--c‡˜ƒma-i.
These two section are in alphabetical order, though that order dose
not extend beyond the initial letter.
There are, in this nika--u about 2800 words
having one number of words being about 4265. |
POTIKAL-NIKANTU |
Further progress in the alphabetical order was made
in
Potikai- nika--u (Second Part),
which dealt with 2228 words having more than one meaning. This work, a
clear reference to which is found in a prefatory stanza of Nƒmat…pa
Nika--u, must have been composed in adout 1750 A.D The
author, as mentioned already, was Swƒminƒtha Kavirƒyar of Kallidai-k-kuricci. He definitely gives up all sectional
classifications in the treatment of words. This is a great advance upon
both Akarƒti-nika--u
and al-porn--c‡˜ƒma-i.An improvement
has also been effected in another important direction, the alphabetical
arrangement having been carried as far as the second letter of each word. About this time, the alphabetical order must have become very popular; and the earlier nika—u came to be re-arranged alphabetically, wherever possible. One such manuscript of Tivƒkaram has come down to us. It is dated Kollam 877 (i.e., 1702 A.D.). It divides the 11th section into two separate parts-one with the homonyms at the beginning and the other, at the end, of sutras-and arranges each part in alphabetical order. |
GLOSSARIUM OF THE VANISNAVA COMMENTARIES |
Another instance of the popularity of the
alphabetical order might be seen in a word-book on 1
Not published 2
Not
published.-This is different from
Sampradaya Akarƒti of
unknown date, printed some years ago. |