This suspicion is strengthened by Bhartrhari's remarks in hiscommentary on the
edited by the Bhandarkar OrientalResearch Institute under the name
Bhartrhan states(Ms 5dN2; Sw 19.24; AL 15.19-20) :"In the section on what should and what should not be eaten it is heardthat 'five five-nailed [animals] are to be eaten'."So Bhartrhari appears to have known the phrase
as part of a work that contained a section
onwhat should not be eaten, i.e., most probably a work on Dharma. Thiswork apparently listed the five five-nailed animals concerned, forBhartrhari refers to them a few lines later as 'the porcupine etc'
Ms 5d4; Sw 19.28; AL 15.23). This information is not containedin the
What possibly could the work that Bhartrhari refers to in thispeculiar manner have been ? Bhartrhari merely mentions the section
without bothering to name the work
In order toanswer this question we may first recall that Bhartrhari appears tohave been a Maitayaruya. Rau (1980)
has shown that most of hisVedic quotations can be traced to the
Samhitâ, MänavaSrauta Sütra
Mänava Grhya Sütra.
It seems likely that here tooBhartrhari refers to a text belonging to this school.This impression is strengthened and further specified by the factthat Bhartrhari refers on two other occasions to a 'section'
of an unnamed work; both times the reference can be traced in the
Mäiava Srauta Sütra.
Both of these references are to 'the section onmodification'
Once Bhartrhan states (Ms 2dl(Ml;Sw 8.11-12; AL 7.5-6J:This corresponds to
22.214.171.124:The second time his commentary reads (Ms 3a8-9; Sw 9.3-4; AL7.20-21):1.See also Bronkhorst, 1981, and "Further remarks on Bhartrhari's Vedic Affilia-tion," to appear soon.