98 § 77-] Systems of Sanskrit Grammar author of Särapradipika, and unfavourably criticised by Bhatta Dhanesvara who explicitly calls his own commen. tary ef. As a ms. of this last work is dated Samvat 1653, it clearly follows that Kshemendra could not have lived later than the first quarter of the sixteenth century. Chandrakirti. His commentary is indifferently called Subodhikā or Dipika. From the prasasti given at the end of this commentary we learn that the author was a Jain belonging to the Brihad-Gachchha of Nagpur, resid- ing in a Jain Tirtha called Kautika, and 15th in succession from the founder of the Gachchha, De sūri (Sam. 1174). He had a pupil called Harshakirti who wrote this com- mentary at first hand, and who himself produced a Dhātu- patha and a commentary for the Sarasvata grammar. From the prasasti of this latter work we learn that Chandrakirti was honoured by Sahi Salem' (A. D. 1545 to 1553) the emperor of Delhi. Chandrakirti thus belongs to the second quarter of the sixteenth century. Madhava. The son of Kahnu and pupil of Sriranga. He mentions several commentators before him. If the date of a mas. of his commentary (Sam. 1591) is correct, he must be placed earlier than Chandrakirti. Vasudevabhatta.--He calls himself the pupil of Chandi- śvara and gives the date of his commentary to be Sam- vat 1634. The commentary is called Sarasvataprasāda. Mandana. From the colophon at the end of the #f- we learn that Mandana was the Maha-pradhāna and Sanghapati to Alpasähi. His father was named Vähada 1 Compare any 2 Compare-a zaigrexfa- featurer [ant: ita is fra: #
