Mādhava’s Ṛgvedavyākhyā and the System of Galitas

K. P. Jog’s study, Mādhava’s Ṛgvedavyākhyā and the System of Galitas, examines how Mādhava interprets certain Ṛgvedic passages by following the system of galita (omission or inclusion of repeated textual units) as used by Śākalya in the padapāṭha (Pp). The paper builds on earlier observations and unfinished work by C. K. Rāja, with reference to the Samayānukramaṇī and addresses whether it can be ascribed to Mādhava. Mādhava identifies specific principles behind Śākalya’s omissions: A unit of sense must consist of at least three padas (words) (tṛtīka, catuṣka). When repeated, the group must retain identical meaning. Only then will Śākalya omit them in later passages; if the Samayānukramaṇī is also his work, case, accent, and word order must also match. Through examples from the first Adhyāya of the first Aṣṭaka of the Ṛgveda Saṃhitā, Jog illustrates cases where identical wording is kept or dropped depending on syntactical role and meaning differences. Cases include verses such as 1.13.6 vs. 1.142.6 (different meanings of identical feet), 1.13.8 vs. 1.142.8 (syntactic structure affecting omission), and several comparisons (e.g., 1.14.3, 1.14.11, 1.16.5) showing decisions based on context, grammatical completion, or semantic nuance. Jog notes that in most examples, Mādhava follows Śākalya consistently, revealing that Śākalya’s approach is not mechanical but guided by syntactical considerations. However, doubts remain in certain interpretations—e.g., treating asañcataḥ in 1.13.6, the reading of hotarau daivyau kavī in 1.13.8, and the meaning of adhvara in 1.16.5—where alternative grammatical or contextual readings seem possible. The study concludes that while Śākalya’s galita system contains subtle interpretive decisions that require an experienced scholar to discern, Mādhava’s fidelity to this method is unflinching, reflecting both the interpretive strength and occasional ambiguity of this tradition.

Summary reviewed by a volunteer editor.