identical in form with it. Thus (to take the commentator's example), tve is later (iv.10) declared pragraha except at the end of a separable word, as in the passage tve kratum (iii.5.101); the exception specified is necessary, because the tue of a word like adititve (p. aditi-tve) is also a pada or vocable;-but it is not therefore to be inferred that the tve of kratve, in the passage kratve dakshaya (iii.2.52; 3.114), is also pragraha. As the commentator had formerly derived grahanam (1.22) from grhyate, so now he derives grahanani from grhnanti, 'they seize, take.' The principle here taught is appealed to several times (under iv. 11,38; vii.2) hereafter, in order to the settlement of doubtful points. It would seem possible to be still made a question whether the citation in any particular rule were a pada, a full word,' or a padaikadeça, 'part of a word,' since citations of the latter kind are also frequently made. Perhaps the commentator would settle the difficulty by asserting that no combination of articulate sounds which actually occurs in the Sanhitâ as a pada is ever cited in any other character. श्रपि विकृतम् ॥ ५१ ॥ 51. But that word, even when phonetically altered. The commentator gives two examples. The word vahana, he says, is cited later (vii.6) as one whose n is liable to conversion inton this conversion, then, still holds good, though the final syllable of the word have become o: thus, praváhano vahniḥ (1.3.3). Again, syaḥ, by v.15, loses its final visarga; and it does so, even when its s is changed to sh, as in ayam u shya pra devayuḥ (iii.5.111). As regards the former of these examples, it might seem to be provided for by rule i.22, above: but the commentator would doubtless plead that the rule would apply to váhanaḥ, but not to váhano. 1 50. padagrahaneshu sútreshu grhitam padam eva gamyeta: ' jnátavyam: na padaikadeçaḥ. yatha: tve ity aningyantaḥ (iv.10) iti vakshyati: tatha sati tve... iti pragraho bhavati: kra-... iti padáikadeçán' na bhavati. gṛhnanti 'ti grahaṇâni: padánám grahanani padagrahanani: teshu. 4 1 M. ins. tad. 2 G. M. -çam. 3 W. animhy-; B. aniny. G. M. -çatván. 51. apiçabdaḥ padam anvádiçati: padagrahaneshu vikṛtam api padam avagantavyam. yatha: natrápattâu váhana (vii.6) iti grahishyate: padam iti kṛtvá visarjaniya otram ápanne pi natvam nai 'va nivartate: pra eshasasyaḥ (v.15) iti visarjaniyalopagrahanam paṭhishyate: ay-... ity atra sakáre shatvam âpanne' visargalopo bhavaty eva. 1 G. M. ins. 'pi. श्रप्यकारादि ॥ ५२ ॥ 52. And even when preceded by a. The evident occasion of this rule is the frequent occurrence of words with the negative prefix a attached to them. But, it being once established, its sphere is not restricted to that class of compounds, as is shown in the very example chosen by the commentator to illustrate its working. By iii.2, çva is included among the words whose final a is liable to be shortened; then, by this rule, açva is also included: e. g. açvávantaй (p. açra-vantam) sahasrinam (iii.3.111). Application of this principle is quite frequently made below (under iii.2,8; v.13,16; vi.5,14; viii.8,13; xi. 16; xvi.6,1×). अकारादि च ॥ ५३ ॥ 53. And when preceded by an. The origin and aim of this rule are obviously the same with those of the preceding, but the instances of its application are less frequent it is appealed to but three times in the sequel (under rules iii.7, viii.8, and xvi.29). The last case is the one selected by the commentator as his example. The word aйçu, by xvi.29, contains anusvára; hence the same word preceded by an is to be regarded as included with it, as in the passage anangu kurvantaḥ (iii.2.21). The commentator now raises the question: how comes kára to 52. atra 'py apiçabdaḥ padánvádeçakaḥ: padagrahaṇeshv akárády api padaṁ vijñeyam: çvartávayuná (iii.2) iti hrasvadeçe vakshyati: akáråder api tasya grahaṇasya hrasvatvam bhavati. yathá: açv-............. akára ádir yasya tut tathoktam. 1 G. M. -dig. G. M. ca. 3 G. M. prefixes the preceding three words of the cited rule. 53. cakáraḥ padam iti bodhayati: padagrahaneshv ankárády api padam vijneуam: añçu (xvi.29) ity anusvárágame vakshyati: ankáráder api tasya 'nusvárágamaḥ syát. yatha: an----- ankára ádir yasya tat tathoktam. nany atra sútre 'n ity asya károttaratvaṁ katham kriyate: varṇaḥ karottaraḥ (i.16) iti sútre varnasya' károttaratvavidhanabhangaprasangát. ucyate: satyam etacchastrabalán 'na kriyate: kim tu çástrântarabaláť kriyate: yathá: páṇiníyá ‘evakára apikára ityúdinâm sádhutvam kathayanti: eram atrá 'pi evam aḥkára ágama (1.23) ity atra' codyaparihârâu vijñeyâu. (1) G. M. varnaçabdasya. 2 G. M. tasya. (3) B. om. (4) G. M. evakáre 'pi-. 5 G. M. atrá 'pi. be added here to the syllable an? since offense is thus committed against the precept in rule 16, above, that kura is added to an alphabetic sound to form its name. His answer is: true enough that it is not done by authority of this text-book; but it is done by the authority of other text-books; for example, Panini's followers establish the propriety of such expressions as evakára, apikara (for the words eva and api). So likewise in this very treatise (in rule 23, above) we have aḥkára for aḥ; and the same objection and answer are to be understood as applying there. See the note under rule 16. एकवर्णाः पदमपक्तः ॥५४॥ 54. A single sound composing a word is called apṛkta. The commentator explains ekavarṇaḥ after the fashion usual with him in treating a karmadharaya or determinative compound: "that is both single (eka) and a sound (varna); hence, a single sound." The term apṛkta means, he says, 'uncombined with a consonant.' As example of an apṛkta word, he quotes sa uv ekavinçavartaniḥ (iv.3.32), where ue is, by rule ix. 16, representative of the particle u; and, as counter-example, to illustrate the force of the specification "composing a word," yajñapatáзv iti (vi.6.23), where v, though in a manner isolated, is not apṛkta, being only a fragment of a word. Rule ix. 16 exemplifies the use of the term. श्रान्तवच्च ॥ ५५॥ 55. And is treated both as initial and as final. As an instance of the treatment of an apṛkta word as initial, the commentary again cites the passage sa uv ekavinçavartaniḥ (iv.3. 32), and declares that in it is to be seen the effect of rule 41, above (G. M. have here a lacuna, and omit the reference to the rule, along with the other instance). This is quite unintelligible to me, since 1 54. eka¢ cứ ’sâu varnag cái ' kavarah: sa cet padam bhavati 80 pṛktaḥ syát. yathá: sa............. padam iti kim: yaj-........... samjñáyáḥ prayojanam: ukáro pṛktaḥ prakṛtya3 (ix.16) iti. apṛkta iti vyañjanená 'samyuta* ity arthaḥ. I B. ins. sa. 2 G. M. -ktasamjña. 3 G. M. add the remaining two words of the cited rule. G. M. -yukta. 4 55. cakáránvádishṭam tad apṛktasaṁjñam padam ádyantavac1 ca káryabhag bhavati. ádivad yatha: sa... ity atra 'tasy á "dir uccáistarám (i.41) iti káryam bhavati: antavad yathá : o te... ity atra' 'ntaḥ (iv.3) iti pragrahakáryam3 bhavati. ádiç cá 'ntaç cá "dyantâu: táv ivá "dyantavat. 1 G. M. ádivad ant-. (2) G. M. om. 3 G. M. -ho. the rule referred to teaches nothing whatever that is characteristic of an initial sound-indeed, teaches no karyam, 'effect,' at all. For the treatment of such a word as a final, we have as an example the passage o te yanti (1.4.33), in which o is pragraha; with reference to rule iv.3, which teaches that only a final vowel is pragraha. With this rule and the preceding compare Vaj. Pr. i.151-2, which are nearly identical with them in form and meaning. The Rik Pr. does not define the term apṛkta, but gives respecting it a rule corresponding with the present one. Both give in illustration the same passage, indre "hi (indra: á: ihi), analogous with the one (bhakshe" hi, iii.2.51) quoted below, under v.3. वर्णस्य विकारतायी ॥ ९६ ॥ 56. Alteration and omission are of a single sound. That is to say, not of a whole word. Where, as by v.19, more than one letter is omitted, each is specified. The cited examples are, of alteration, dhársháháu (1.2.82 by rule v.10); of omission, sa te jánáti (1.2.142-3 by rule v.15). I find this rule expressly appealed to but once in the sequel (under ix.7). विनाशो लोपः ॥ ५७॥ 57. Omission is complete loss. As example of lopa, 'omission,' the commentator quotes the passage sa im "andrá suprayasaḥ (iv.1.81-2), where the initial of mandra is lost after im (by rule v.12: see the note there given). As example of the use of the term, he gives rule v.11, which is introductory to the subject of omissions. He then proceeds to state a very curious reason why such a precept as this should seem called for: "some have maintained the eternity of sound: in order to the confutation of that doctrine, this rule hath been uttered, in conformity with general grammar." Panini's corresponding precept (i.1.60) is adarçanam lopaḥ, omission is disappearance from view.' 56 varnumátrasya rikáralopáu syátám na tu sarvasya padasya. vikáras tárát: dhú- iti: 'lopas tu': sa............. (1) W. om. B. omits this whole comment, along with the following rule. 57. varṇavináço' lopasaṁjño bhavati. yatha: sa............. samjayaḥ prayojanam: atha lopaḥ (v.11) ity adi. varnasya nityatám kecid áhuḥ: tannirákaraṇāya vyâkaraṇānusáreṇa sútram etad abháņi. 1 G. M. varnasya v-. अन्वादेशो ऽन्त्यस्य ॥ ५८ ॥ 58. Continued implication is of that which was last. The term anvádeça, 'after-indication,' with its corresponding verbal forms, and other equivalent expressions (especially anvakarshaka, ákarshaka, etc.), is constantly employed in the commentary to signify the continued force in a given rule of some specification made in a preceding rule. And the simple meaning of the present precept appears to be, that such a bringing forward is of the predicate last used, the word last cited, or the like. The commentator's first example is entirely accordant with this understanding in rule vii.3, namely, to the effect that the n of hanyát and upyamânam is changed to n, the implication is "after nih, nih being the last mentioned in a list of altering words given in the preceding rule. But he goes on to make another application of the precept: rule xv.8 says, "a, however, even in samhita [is protracted and nasalized];" and it is to be understood that only a "last" or "final" a is intended-as in suçlokáñ3 (1.8.162), protracted from suçloka; while in brahmaзn tvan rajan (1.8.161,2), agnáз ity áha (vi.5.84), vicityaḥ somás na vicityáз iti (vi.1.91), where the words protracted are brahman, agne, somah, and vicityah, and the a is not a final, there is no nasalization Evidently, this is a wholly forced and false interpretation: no rule can mean two things so utterly different. Compare the notes to iv.3 and xv. 8, where the principle is appealed to. The comment seeks a kind of support for its double interpretation by calling attention to the distinction between an "affecting cause" (nimitta), like the nih brought forward from vii.2 to vii.3 in the first example, and an "affected" word or element (nimittin, having a cause'), such as is concerned in the second example. The latter (nearly synonymous with lakshya, used in the comment to i.22) he defines as "something original (? pradhána seems to be taken here in the sense of prakṛti) suffering a prescribed effect." No one of the other Prâtiçâkhyas attempts to lay down any rules as to the anvádeça (or anuvṛtti); and its usages are, in fact, wholly irreducible to rule-a circumstance which involves the condemnation of the sutra style of composition, because the sútras are not and cannot be self-explanatory, or intelligible without an authoritative comment. 58. nimittasya nimittino vá "ntyasya 'nvâdeço bhavati: nimitti 'ti pradhanam' káryabhag iti yávat. nimittasya yatha: hanyád upyamanam ca (vii.3) ity asya 'tra' niḥçabdasya. nimittino yatha: akáras tu saňhitayam api (xv.8) ity atra suçlokans ity antyasya 'kárasya: antyasye 'ti kim: brah-....: ag-....: vic..... 1 W. -nám; G. M. -na. 2 G. M. om. 3 B. om. all the signs of protraction. 6 VOL. IX. |