svarānantarhitavacanam .
[Vārttika] [There should be] the statement ‘not separated by a vowel’ (svara-anantarhita-vacana).
svaraiḥ anantarhitāḥ halaḥ saṃyogasañjñāḥ bhavanti iti vaktavyam .
It should be stated (vaktavya): ‘consonants (hal) not separated (anantarhita) by vowels (svaraiḥ) are [termed] saṁyoga’.
kim prayojanam .
What is the purpose (prayojana)?
vyavahitānām mā bhūt .
So that [the saṁjñā] may not [apply] to [consonants] separated (vyavahita) [by a vowel].
pacati panasam .
[As in] pacati panasam (‘he cooks the jackfruit’).
nanu ca anantarāḥ iti ucyate .
But surely (nanu ca) ‘anantarāḥ’ (contiguous) is [already] said [in the sūtra].
tena vyavahitānām na bhaviṣyati .
By that (tena), [the saṁjñā] will not [apply] to the separated (vyavahita) ones.
dṛṣṭam ānantaryam vyavahite .
[Vārttika] Contiguity (ānantarya) is seen (dṛṣṭa) [even] in what is separated (vyavahita).
vyavahite api anantaraśabdaḥ dṛśyate .
Even in what is separated (vyavahita), the word ‘anantara’ (contiguous) is seen (dṛśyate).
tat yathā : anantarau imau grāmau iti ucyate .
That is, for instance: ‘these two villages are contiguous (anantarau)’ is said.
tayoḥ ca eva antarā nadyaḥ ca parvatāḥ ca bhavanti .
And yet between those very two (tayoḥ … antarā) there are rivers and mountains.
yadi tarhi vyavahite api anantaraśabdaḥ bhavati ānantaryavacanam idānīm kimartham syāt .
If then (yadi tarhi) the word ‘anantara’ applies even to what is separated (vyavahita), then for what purpose (kimartham) now would the statement of contiguity (ānantarya-vacana) [in the sūtra] be?
ānantaryavacanam kimartham iti cet ekapratiṣedhārtham .
[Vārttika] If [it is asked] ‘for what purpose the statement of contiguity?’ — [it is] for the sake of the prohibition of a single [consonant] (eka-pratiṣedha).
ekasya halaḥ saṃyogasañjñā mā bhūt iti .
So that the saṁyoga-saṁjñā may not [apply] to a single consonant (ekasya hal) — thus.
kim ca syāt yadi ekasya halaḥ saṃyogasañjñā syāt .
And what would happen if the saṁyoga-saṁjñā were [to apply] to a single consonant?
iyeṣa , uvoṣa .
[As in] iyeṣa, uvoṣa.
ijādeḥ ca gurumataḥ anṛcchaḥ iti ām prasajyeta .
By [the rule] ‘ijādeś ca gurumato ’nṛcchaḥ’ the [affix] ām would be wrongly occasioned (prasajyeta).
na vā atajjātīyavyavāyāt .
[Vārttika] Or rather not (na vā), because of intervention by something not of that kind (atajjātīya-vyavāya).
na vā eṣaḥ doṣaḥ .
Or rather, this is not a fault (na vā eṣa doṣaḥ).
kim kāraṇam .
What is the reason (kāraṇa)?
atajjātīyasya vyavāyāt .
Because of intervention (vyavāya) by something not of that kind (atajjātīya).
atajjātīyakam hi loke vyavadhāyakam bhavati .
For in ordinary usage (loke) it is something not of that kind (atajjātīyaka) that causes separation (vyavadhāyaka).
katham punaḥ jñāyate atajjātīyakam loke vyavadhāyakam bhavati iti .
But how (kathaṁ punaḥ) is it known (jñāyate) that in ordinary usage something not of that kind is a separator — thus?
evam hi kam cit kaḥ cit pṛcchati .
For thus (evaṁ hi) someone (kaścit) asks someone (kaṁ cit):
anantare* ete brāhmaṇakule* iti .
‘Are these two brāhmaṇa families contiguous (anantare)?’ — thus.
na anantare .
‘[They are] not contiguous (na anantare).’
vṛṣalakulam anayoḥ antarā iti .
‘A vṛṣala (śūdra) family is between the two (anayor antarā)’ — thus.
kim punaḥ kāraṇam kva cit atajjātīyakam vyavadhāyakam bhavati kva cit na .
But what is the reason (kāraṇa) that in some cases (kvacit) something not of that kind is a separator, and in others (kvacit) not?
sarvatra eva hi atajjātīyakam vyavadhāyakam bhavati .
For everywhere (sarvatra eva) something not of that kind (atajjātīyaka) is a separator (vyavadhāyaka).
katham anantarau imau grāmau iti .
[Then] how [is it said] ‘these two villages are contiguous (anantarau)’?
grāmaśabdaḥ ayam bahvarthaḥ .
This word ‘grāma’ (village) has many meanings (bahv-artha).
asti eva śālāsamudāye vartate .
There is [a use where] it denotes (vartate) the aggregate of houses (śālā-samudāya).
tat yathā grāmaḥ dagdhaḥ iti .
That is, for instance: ‘the village is burnt’ — thus.
asti vāṭaparikṣepe vartate .
There is [a use where] it denotes the enclosing fence (vāṭa-parikṣepa).
tat yathā grāmam praviṣṭaḥ .
That is, for instance: ‘he entered the village’.
asti manuṣyeṣu vartate .
There is [a use where] it denotes the people (manuṣya).
tat yathā grāmaḥ gataḥ , grāmaḥ āgataḥ iti .
That is, for instance: ‘the village has gone, the village has come’ — thus.
asti sāraṇyake sasīmake sasthaṇḍilake vartate .
There is [a use where] it denotes [the village] together with its forest (sāraṇyaka), together with its boundary (sasīmaka), together with its open ground (sasthaṇḍilaka).
tat yathā grāmaḥ labdhaḥ iti .
That is, for instance: ‘a village was obtained’ — thus.
tat yaḥ sāraṇyake sasīmake sasthaṇḍilake vartate tam abhisamīkṣya etat prayujyate : anantarau imau grāmau iti .
So it is with reference to that [sense] (tam abhisamīkṣya) which denotes [the village] together with forest, boundary, and open ground, that this is used: ‘these two villages are contiguous (anantarau)’ — thus.
sarvatra eva hi atajjātīyakam vyavadhāyakam bhavati .
For everywhere (sarvatra eva) something not of that kind (atajjātīyaka) is a separator (vyavadhāyaka).