The importance of the Kāśikā for Indological research is not in doubt. It is the oldest surviving commentary on the whole of Pāṇini's Aṣṭādhyāyī. It is our earliest testimony for all those sūtras of Pāṇini's text that are not cited, used or referred to in Patañjali's Mahābhāṣya. It is also the earliest text in the Pāṇinian traditon that contains a full Gaṇapāṭha, i.e., a complete collection of the lists (gaṇa) of words that accompany many sūtras. Being the earliest text of its kind that has survived, the Kāśikā is an indispensable tool for all historical research into the early history of indigenous Sanskrit grammar, Pāṇinian and non-Pāṇinian.

The Kāśikā is also a text that is surrounded by mysteries. Is it called Kāśikā because it was composed in Kāśi —i.e. Benares, or Vārāṇasī— as it is sometimes maintained? Or is this name a simple derivative from the root KĀŚ-, like prakāśikā, in which case it merely means “[commentary] that illumines, that explains”? And what can be believed of the story of the double authorship of the text, by Jayāditya and Vāmana? Attempts to apportion different parts of the text to different authors have so far failed, or have led to mutually contradictory proposals.