Page:Systems-of-Sanskrit-Grammar-SK Belvalkar.pdf/107

[§ 77 Commentators on Sarasvata-prakriya 99 and he belonged to the Kharatara Gachchha. The com- mentary subsequent to the fu seems to have been written by one of his pupils. From one of the mss. of the commentary (Dec. Coll. collection, no. 13 of 1877-78) we gather that Alpasahi or Alam was a king of Malva, whose minister (amätya) was known as Padama. Vähada the father of Mandana was a brother to this Padama, and was, besides, himself a Sangheśvara or Sanghapati. Our Mandana accordingly must have inherited his father's office and title. We are not yet certain as to who this Alpasāhi, king of Malva, was.¹ Probably he was merely some local chieftain. The earliest dated ms. of the com- mentary belongs to the year 1574 A. D. Megharatna. He was a Jain belonging to the Brihat- Kharatara Gachchha, and the pupil of Vinayasundara. The commentary is called Sarasvatavyäkaranaḍhundhikā or Särasvatadīpikã. A ms. of this work is dated Sarnvat 1614 (A. D. 1556), and this gives the lower limit for Megha- ratna. Dhanesvara. He wrote his commentary with the avowed object of correcting Kshemendra. As a conse- quence he comes after Kshemendra and before 1595 Á. D.,, when one of the mss. of Dhanesvara's commentary was copied. He has written, as mentioned in the prašasti of 1 Professor S. R. Bhandarkar in bis Report of a second tour in search of mss. in Rajputana and Central India (1904-5 and 1905-6) mentions a fécur on afer, which is written in Samvat 1369. This fecura was made during the 2 He must be distinguished from (Elliot and DowвOD, iii. pp. 167 and 208). If this Alpa- khana be the sam as our Alpasuhi, Mandana will have to be placed even before Punjaraja, which however does not appear very likely. > reign of Alpakhana who has been identified with the bro- ther-in-law of Sultan Alaudin Bopadeva's preceptor, who was also named Dhanesvara.