Prakaraṇa 2 · SK 34–46

परिभाषाप्रकरणम्

paribhāṣāprakaraṇam · 13 sūtras

SK 34 · A 1.1.3गुणवृद्धिस्थाननिर्देशपरिभाषा

इको गुणवृद्धी ॥ ३४ ॥

iko guṇavṛddhī

guṇa and vṛddhi [when prescribed by those terms] are [understood to come] in place of ik.

Rule. Wherever a rule prescribes guṇa or vṛddhi by using those very words, the word ikaḥ, "of ik", presents itself in that rule. The guṇa or vṛddhi therefore comes in place of an ik vowel (i, u, ṛ, ḷ) of the item concerned. Bhaṭṭoji's word for "presents itself" is upatiṣṭhate: the genitive ikaḥ becomes part of the other rule's sentence, and each rule construes it in its own way. The words guṇa and vṛddhi are carried into this sūtra by anuvṛtti from SK 16 and SK 17.

Example.

mid (a root) → the rule mider guṇaḥ (A 7.3.82) says "guṇa of mid", naming no sound → ikaḥ presents itself: the guṇa falls on the ik of mid, its i → the i is replaced by its guṇa, e (why e and not a is settled at SK 39) → med-.

Likewise the rule sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ (A 7.3.84), which prescribes guṇa for a root before certain affixes: its working on the i of ci and the u of stu is shown at SK 39 (cetā, stotā).

Applies when / blocked by. Only where the words guṇa or vṛddhi actually prescribe something. Not at a mere restatement: vṛddhir yasyācām ādis tad vṛddham (A 1.1.73) uses the word vṛddhi to describe a word, not to prescribe a change, and a paribhāṣā does not present itself at a restatement. Not where the words are absent: tyadādīnām aḥ (A 7.2.102) prescribes an a without calling it guṇa, so ikaḥ does not come; which sound that a replaces is settled by SK 42 instead.

Watch out. The sūtra's ikaḥ stands for its own form. What is inserted into the other rules is that genitive word itself, so read "guṇa of mid" as "guṇa of the ik of mid".

Siddhānta-kaumudī

गुणवृद्धिशब्दाभ्यां यत्र गुणवृद्धी विधीयेते तत्रेक इति षष्ठ्यन्तं पदमुपतिष्ठते ॥

Where guṇa and vṛddhi are prescribed by the words "guṇa" and "vṛddhi," there the word ikaḥ, ending in the sixth [genitive] case, presents itself (upatiṣṭhate).

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 19

—गुणवृद्धिशब्दाभ्यामिति । एतच्च पूर्वसूत्राभ्यां गुणवृद्धिपदे अनुवर्त्य गुणो वृद्धिरिति ये गुणवृद्धी इति योजनया लभ्यते । तेनेह न 'त्वादीनामः' इमम्, 'दिव औत्' द्यौः ॥—विधीयेते इति । यत्र त्वनुवादो 'वृद्धिर्यस्याचामादिः'— इत्यादौ तत्रेक इति षष्ठ्यन्तं नोपतिष्ठते । अनुवादे परिभाषाणामनुपस्थितेरिति भावः । 'अनुवादे परिभाषाणाम्' इत्यस्यानूयमानविशेषणेष्वित्यर्थः । अनुपस्थितौ लिङ्गं फलं च 'उदीचामातः स्थाने'— इत्यत्र स्फुटीकरिष्यते ॥—षष्ठ्यन्तमिति । सूत्रे षष्ठ्यन्तस्यानुकरणाच्छब्दस्वरूपपरतया नपुंसकत्वात्सोर्लुकि 'अत्वसन्तस्य'— इति दीर्घो नेति भावः ॥—पदमिति । तच्च संभवति सामानाधिकरण्ये इगन्तस्याङ्गस्येत्यादिकमेण संवध्यते । 'मिदेर्गुणः', 'मृजेर्वृद्धिः' इत्यादौ तु सामानाधिकरण्यासंभवान्मिदिमृज्योरवयवस्येक इति संवध्यते

Bālamanoramā

इको गुणवृद्धी - इको गुणवृद्धि । 'इक' इति षष्टन्तशब्दः स्वरूपपरो नपुंसकलिङ्गः प्रथमैकवचनान्तः । सोर्लुका लुप्तत्वादत्वसन्तस्येति दीर्घो न ओ ।इकस्शब्द इत्यर्थः । 'उपतिष्ठते' इति शेषः । 'वृद्धिरादैच्' 'अदेङ्गुणः' इत्यतो वृद्धिरिति गुण इति चानुवर्तते । इतिशब्दोऽध्याहार्यः ।यत्र विधीयते तत्रे॑त्यप्यध्याहार्यम् । गुणो वृद्धिरित्युच्चार्य यत्र गुणवृद्धि विधीयेते तत्र इक इति षष्ठन्तं पदमुपतिष्ठत इति योजना । तदाह — गुणवृद्धिशब्दाभ्यामित्यादिना । उपतिष्ठत इति । सङ्गतं भवतीत्यर्थः ।उपाद्देवपूचासङ्गतिकरणे॑त्यात्मनेपदम् । सोऽयं पदोपस्थितिपक्षो भाष्यादौ सिद्धान्तितः ।सार्वधातुकार्धधातुकयोः॑, मिदेर्गुणः॑ इत्याद्युदाहरणम् । इक इत्यस्यान्वयप्रकारस्तु तत्र तत्र स्पष्टीभवष्यति । 'यत्र विधीयेते' इत्युक्त्यावृद्धिर्यस्याचा॑मित्याद्यनुवादे इक इति नोपतिष्ठते । अनुवादे परिभाषामनुपस्थितेः । 'त्यदादीनामः' इत्यादावपि नेदमुपतिष्ठते, तत्र गुणवृद्धिशब्दयोरश्रवणात् ।

iko guṇavṛddhī — iko guṇavṛddhī. [In Bhaṭṭoji's gloss] "ika iti": the word [ikaḥ], which [in the sūtra] ends in the sixth case, here refers to its own form (svarūpa-para), is neuter in gender, and ends in the first-case singular; since [its ending] su has been elided by luk, the lengthening of an at/as-ending [stem before su, prescribed] by "atvasantasya [cādhātoḥ]" (A 6.4.14), does not take place. The meaning is: the word is *ikas* [the genitive form quoted as a word, ending in -as]. "upatiṣṭhate" [presents itself] is [the predicate] to be supplied. From "vṛddhir ādaic" (A 1.1.1) and "ad eṅ guṇaḥ" (A 1.1.2), [the words] vṛddhi and guṇa are carried forward (anuvṛtti) [into this rule]. The word "iti" must be supplied (adhyāhārya); "where they are prescribed, there" must likewise be supplied. The construal (yojanā) is: where guṇa and vṛddhi are prescribed by uttering [the words] "guṇa" and "vṛddhi," there the sixth-case-ending word ikaḥ presents itself. This is just what he states with "guṇavṛddhiśabdābhyām" etc. "upatiṣṭhate" — the meaning is: it becomes [syntactically] connected (saṅgata). The ātmanepada is by "upād devapūjāsaṅgatikaraṇa-" [the rule prescribing ātmanepada for upa-sthā in the senses of worship of gods, joining together, etc.]. This position of the presentation of the word (padopasthiti-pakṣa) is the one established as siddhānta in the Bhāṣya and elsewhere. "sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ" (A 7.3.84) and "mider guṇaḥ" (A 7.3.82) are examples. The manner in which "ikaḥ" construes [in each rule] will become clear in the several places. By the statement "where they are prescribed (vidhīyete)": in a mere restatement (anuvāda) such as "vṛddhir yasyācām [ādis tad vṛddham]" (A 1.1.73), "ikaḥ" does not present itself, because a paribhāṣā does not present itself at a restatement. In "tyadādīnām aḥ" (A 7.2.102) and the like, too, this does not present itself, since the words "guṇa" and "vṛddhi" are not heard there.

translator notes

textual The digital source reads 'ṣaṣṭanta' twice for 'ṣaṣṭhyanta', 'spaṣṭībhavaṣyati' for 'spaṣṭībhaviṣyati', and a stray 'o' after 'dīrgho na'. The transmitted 'ikasśabda' is retained as coherent: the svarūpa-para word is the genitive form ikas quoted as a word, which is why A 6.4.14 is cited as not applying.

SK 35 · A 1.2.28ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतादेशस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

अचश्च ॥ ३५ ॥

acaśca

And [an operation taught with the words hrasva, dīrgha, or pluta takes place] in place of a vowel (ac).

Rule. And wherever a rule prescribes an operation by using the words hrasva, dīrgha or pluta, the word acaḥ, "of a vowel", presents itself in that rule. The shortening, lengthening or protraction therefore falls on a vowel (an ac) of the item concerned. The words ac and hrasva-dīrgha-pluta come by anuvṛtti from SK 4; acaḥ, like ikaḥ in SK 34, stands for its own form.

Example.

śrīpā used as a neuter stem → the rule hrasvo napuṃsake prātipadikasya (A 1.2.47) says "short for a neuter stem", naming no sound → acaḥ presents itself: the shortening falls on a vowel, here the final ā → ā is replaced by short a → śrīpa-, seen in the neuter word śrīpam.

Applies when / blocked by. Only where the word hrasva (or dīrgha, pluta) is actually heard. In diva ut (A 6.1.131), which prescribes the short u by naming the sound, the paribhāṣā does not act. And the operation needs a vowel to fall on: in supāt brāhmaṇakulam the neuter stem supād does not end in a vowel, so no shortening happens.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतशब्दैर्यत्राज्विधीयते तत्राच इति षष्ठ्यन्तं पदमुपतिष्ठते ॥

Wherever [an operation] is enjoined by means of the words hrasva, dīrgha, and pluta, there the word acaḥ — a pada ending in the sixth [genitive] case — presents itself (upatiṣṭhate).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 19

—अचश्च । इत्यदीर्घत्यादि । एतच्च 'ऊकालोऽज्झसदीर्घस्तः' इति सूत्रादज्हसदीर्घस्त इत्यनुवर्त्य हस्वो दीर्घः स्त इति योऽजिति योजनया लभ्यते । हस्वेत्यादि किम्, 'दिव उत्' द्युभ्याम्, 'अष्टन आ विभक्तौ' अष्टौ । 'अष्टाभ्य औश्' इत्यत्र कृतात्वनिर्देशाज्झापकाज्झसोर्विषये प्रवर्तमानस्य 'अष्टनः'— इत्यात्वस्याच्स्थानिकत्वे सति नैतस्सिद्धेदिति दिक् ॥—षष्ठ्यन्तं पदमिति । तच्च सति संभवे सामानाधिकरण्येनैव संवध्यते न वैयधिकरण्येन । तेन 'हस्वो नपुंसके'— इत्यजन्तप्रातिपदिकस्यैव हस्वः । श्रीपम् । नेह—सुवाग् ब्राह्मणकुलम् 'शमामष्टानां दीर्घः'— इत्यत्र तु सामानाधिकरण्यासंभवात् शमादीनामच इति संवध्यते, तेन शाम्यतीत्यादि सिद्धम् । 'वाक्यस्य टेः स्तः'— इत्यत्र सामानाधिकरण्यसंभवेऽपि टेर्ग्रहणसामर्थ्यात् टेरवयवस्याचः स्त इति व्याख्यायते । अन्यथा 'अलोऽन्त्यस्य' 'अचश्च' इति परिभाषाभ्यामेहि कृष्णेत्यादिवाक्यान्त्यस्याचः स्तसिद्धौ किमनेन टेर्ग्रहणेन । तेन आयुष्मानेधीन्द्रवर्म३न् इत्यादि सिध्यतीति दिक्

Bālamanoramā

अचश्च - अचश्च । अच इत्यपि षष्ठन्तशब्दः स्वरूपपरः, पूर्वसूत्रे इक इतिवत् । ऊकालोऽजित्यतः 'अच्' 'ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुत' इत्यनुवर्तते । 'इति यत्र विधीयते' इत्यध्याहार्यम् । फलितमाह — ह्रस्वेत्यादिना । 'दिव उत्' इत्यादौ तु नेदं प्रवर्तते, ह्रस्वादिशब्दानामश्रवणात् ।ह्रस्वो नपुंसके प्रातिपादिकस्ये॑त्याद्युदाहरणम् । श्रीपम् । नेह — सुपात् ब्राआहृणकुलम् ।

acaś ca — acaś ca. The word acaḥ, ending in the genitive, is likewise self-referential (svarūpa-para) [it denotes the pratyāhāra ac itself], like ikaḥ in the preceding sūtra [iko guṇavṛddhī, A 1.1.3]. From ūkālo 'j jhrasvadīrghaplutaḥ (A 1.2.27), [the words] "ac" and "hrasva-dīrgha-pluta" are carried forward (anuvṛtti) [into this rule]. The phrase "where [an operation] is enjoined as such" (iti yatra vidhīyate) must be supplied (adhyāhāra). He states the upshot with "hrasva-…" and so on. In diva ut (A 6.1.131) and the like, however, this [paribhāṣā] does not take effect, because the words hrasva and the rest are not heard there. An example is hrasvo napuṃsake prātipadikasya (A 1.2.47) and the like: śrīpam [neuter of śrīpā, its final ā shortened]. Not here: supāt brāhmaṇakulam [the prātipadika supād does not end in an ac, so the shortening does not apply].

translator notes

textual Source garbles, translated per the intended readings (no emendation made to the source): 'brāāhṛṇakulam' for brāhmaṇakulam; 'prātipādikasya' for prātipadikasya in the citation of A 1.2.47; 'ṣaṣṭhanta' for ṣaṣṭhyanta; and a stray accent mark after the citation of A 1.2.47.

SK 36 · A 1.1.46आगमस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

आद्यन्तौ टकितौ ॥ ३६ ॥

ādyantau ṭakitau

[An element] marked with ṭ and [one] marked with k are, respectively, the initial and the final part [of that for which they are prescribed].

Rule. An element marked with ṭ (a ṭit) and an element marked with k (a kit), prescribed for some item, are respectively the initial part and the final part of that item. "Respectively" means first with first, second with second; this pairing is called yathāsaṃkhya and is supplied by the rule yathāsaṃkhyam anudeśaḥ samānām (A 1.3.10). In the sūtra's ṭakitau the a after ṭ is only for pronunciation; the markers are ṭ and k.

Example.

bhavitā → the rule ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ (A 7.2.35) prescribes the augment iṬ for the affix tṛC (seen here as -tā) → the ṭ of iṬ is a marker, so iṬ is ṭit → the i becomes the initial part of that affix → bhav·i·tā.

prāṅ + ṣaṣṭha → the rule ṅṇoḥ kuk ṭuk śari (A 8.3.28) prescribes the augments kuK and ṭuK for a word ending in ṅ or ṇ → the k of kuK is a marker, so kuK is kit → the k becomes the final part of prāṅ → prāṅ·k·ṣaṣṭha.

Applies when / blocked by. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators make two points. First, this rule is an exception — an apavāda, a special rule that sets aside a general rule within the special rule's own field — only to the rule that immediately follows it in the Aṣṭādhyāyī, ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā (SK 38). The maxim behind this, purastād apavādā anantarān vidhīn bādhante nottarān: an exception stated earlier blocks only the rules that immediately follow it, not later ones. Second, this rule does not move affixes. A ṭit affix such as Ṭa (careṣ ṭaḥ, A 3.2.16) or Ṭak (gāpoṣ ṭak, A 3.2.8) still comes after its base, because the later rule paraś ca (A 3.1.2), read with pratyayaḥ (A 3.1.1), says that an affix follows; being later, that rule prevails.

Watch out. The sūtra pairs two things with two things, and Bhaṭṭoji's commentators note that such a pairing is not how a compound works in ordinary speech; the grammar allows it here, as in eco 'yavāyāvaḥ (A 6.1.78), by first taking the two pairs as wholes and then, by the yathāsaṃkhya rule, matching member to member.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

टित्कितौ यस्योक्तौ तस्य क्रमादाद्यन्तावयवौ स्तः ॥

A ṭit and a kit [element], stated for some [term], are, in that order, its initial and its final part (avayava).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 19–20

—आद्यन्तौ टकितौ । भविता, अर्धधातुकस्येद् । पाययति, ‘शाच्छासाह्या—’ इत्यादिना युक् । पुरस्तादपवादन्यायेन स्थानेयोगलस्यायमपवादः । ‘प्रत्ययः’ ‘परश्व’ इत्यनेन तु परलादयं वाध्यते । तेन ‘चरेष्टः’, ‘गापोष्टक्’ इत्यादयः परा एव भवन्ति

Bālamanoramā

आद्यन्तौ टकितौ - आद्यन्तौ टकितौ । आदिश्च अन्तश्च आद्यन्तौ, टश्च कच् टकौ । टकारादकार उच्चारणार्थः । टकौ इतौ ययोस्तौ टकितौ । द्वन्द्वान्त इच्छब्दः प्रत्येकं संबध्यते । टित्कितावाद्यन्तावयवौ स्तः । कस्येत्याकाङ्क्षायां यस्य तौ विहितौ तयोरित्यर्थाल्लभ्यते । तदाह — टित्कितावित्यादिना । क्रमादिति यथासङ्ख्य सूत्रलभ्यम् । टित् आद्यवयवः, किदन्तावयव इत्यर्थः । नचैवं सति मिलितयोरेकत्रान्वयाऽभावात्कथमिह द्वन्द्व इति वाच्यम्, प्रथमतः समुदायरूपेण परस्परं युगलयोरन्वयबोधमादाय द्वन्द्वप्रवृत्तौ सत्यां यथासंख्यसूत्रपर्यालोचनया पुनः प्रत्येकान्वयोपपत्तेः । 'एचोऽयवायावः' इत्यादावप्येषैव गतिः । लोके त्वेवंजातीयकप्रयोगोऽसाधुरेवेति भाष्यादिषु स्पष्टम् । अत्रैव यथासङ्ख्यसूत्रोमन्यासो युक्तः ।आर्धधातुकस्येड्वलादेः॑ भविता ।ङ्णोः कुक् टुक् शरि॑, प्राङ्क्षष्ट इत्याद्युदाहरणम् ।पुरस्तादपवादा अनन्तरान्विधीन् बाधन्ते नोत्तरान् इतिषष्ठी स्थानेयोगे॑त्यस्यानन्तरस्यैवायमपवादः । 'प्रत्ययः' परश्चेत्यनेन तु परत्वादिदं बाध्यते । तेन चरेष्टः गापोष्टगित्यादयः परा एव भवन्ति ।

ādyantau ṭakitau — ādyantau ṭakitau. ādi and anta [make] ādyantau; ṭa and ka [make] ṭakau — the a-sound after the letter ṭ is merely for pronunciation (uccāraṇārtha). Those two which have ṭa and ka as it [markers] are ṭakitau. The word "it" at the end of the dvandva is connected with each member. A ṭit and a kit are the initial and the final part (avayava). Of what? — this expectancy arising, it is obtained from the sense: of that for which the two are prescribed. He says this with "ṭitkitau" and the rest. "kramāt" ("in order") is obtained from the yathāsaṃkhya sūtra [yathāsaṃkhyam anudeśaḥ samānām, A 1.3.10]. The meaning is: a ṭit is the initial part, a kit the final part. Nor should it be objected: "This being so, since the two [terms] taken jointly do not construe in a single locus, how can there be a dvandva here?" — for first the dvandva operates on the basis of a cognition of the mutual connection of the two pairs taken as aggregates, and afterwards, upon consideration of the yathāsaṃkhya sūtra, the connection of each with each is justified. In "eco 'yavāyāvaḥ" [A 6.1.78] and similar cases the same course is followed. In ordinary speech, however, a usage of this type is simply incorrect (asādhu) — this is plain in the Bhāṣya and elsewhere. It would have been proper to cite the yathāsaṃkhya sūtra at this very point. "ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ" [A 7.2.35, prescribing the ṭit augment iṬ, hence initial] — bhavitā; "ṅṇoḥ kuk ṭuk śari" [A 8.3.28, prescribing the kit augments kuK and ṭuK, hence final] — prāṅkṣaṣṭa, and the like, are the examples. By [the paribhāṣā] "apavādas stated earlier block [only] the immediately following rules, not the later ones" (purastād apavādā anantarān vidhīn bādhante nottarān), this is an apavāda only of the immediately following "ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā" [A 1.1.49]. By "pratyayaḥ" [A 3.1.1] together with "paraś ca" [A 3.1.2], however, this [rule] is blocked, [that provision] being para [the later, and so the prevailing, rule]; thereby [the ṭit affixes] Ṭa of "careṣ ṭaḥ" [A 3.2.16], Ṭak of "gāpoṣ ṭak" [A 3.2.8], and the like come only after [the base].

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 20 १ अवयवाविति—अवयवत्वे हि ‘यदागमास्तद्गुणीभूतास्तद्वहणेन गृह्यन्ते’ इति परिभाषोपतिष्ठते । अस्याश्च ‘देवदत्तस्याङ्गाधिक्ये तद्विशिष्टस्यैव देवदत्तग्रहणेन ग्रहणं भवति’ इति लौकिकन्यायो मानम् । अतएव नेटीति निषेधश्चरितार्थः । २ प्रसङ्ग इति—प्रसङ्गश्च सति संभवे अर्थवत एव, अर्थप्रत्यायनार्थं शब्दप्रयोगात् । एवं चैरुरित्यादेस्तेस्तुरित्यर्थः फलति, ‘तेन सर्वे सर्वपदादेशा इति सिद्धम् । ३ स्थानेऽन्तर इति—पष्ठीत्यनुवृत्त्या यत्र स्थाने पष्ठी तत्रेदमिति बोध्यम् । ४ सदृशतम इति—अर्थात्प्राप्यमाणानां मध्ये इत्यर्थः ।

translator notes

textual The digital source reads "prāṅkṣaṣṭa"; prāṅkṣaṣṭhaḥ (prāṅ + ṣaṣṭha- with the augment kuK) may be expected. It also reads "yathāsaṅkhyasūtromanyāso", evidently for "yathāsaṅkhyasūtropanyāso" ("citation of the yathāsaṃkhya sūtra"). The translation follows the expected readings; the transmitted forms are as noted here.
textual In "yasya tau vihitau tayor ity arthāl labhyate" the source reads "tayoḥ" (genitive dual) where the English follows the smoothed sense "of that (tasya)". The suspicious reading is preserved in the source and noted here.

SK 37 · A 1.1.47आगमस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

मिदचोऽन्त्यात्परः ॥ ३७ ॥

midaco'ntyātparaḥ

[An augment] marked with m comes after the last of the vowels (ac) [of the element for which it is prescribed].

Rule. An augment marked with m (a mit) is placed after the last among the vowels of the item it is prescribed for, and it is the final part of that item. Bhaṭṭoji stresses that the sūtra's acaḥ is a genitive, "among the vowels": look at all the vowels of the item, pick the last, and put the augment after it. The word anta, "final part", is carried forward from SK 36 — only that half of ādyantau, because the svarita rests on that half alone (see SK 46).

Example.

vāri + the neuter plural ending → the augment nUM is prescribed for the stem (aṅga, the base to which the ending is being added) → nUM is mit → its n goes after the last vowel of vāri, the i, as the stem's final part → vāri·n- → the stem now ends in n, so sarvanāmasthāne cāsambuddhau (A 6.4.8), which lengthens the vowel of an n-final stem before such an ending, can act → vārīn- → the finished word is vārīṇi (the change of n to ṇ is taught elsewhere).

vaha + liha- (formed with the affix KHaŚ by vahābhre lihaḥ, A 3.2.32) → the augment mUM is prescribed by arur dviṣad- (A 6.3.67) → mUM is mit → its m goes after the last vowel of vaha, as its final part → vaham·liha- → the pada vaham now ends in m, so mo 'nusvāraḥ (A 8.3.23), which turns a pada-final m into anusvāra, can act → vahaṃliha- (nominative vahaṃlihaḥ).

Applies when / blocked by. The genitive reading of acaḥ matters. If acaḥ were read as an ablative, "after the last vowel", the sūtra could not work in rules such as śe mucādīnām (A 7.1.59), where no last vowel is available for it. Read as a genitive of specification, "among the vowels", it can; scholars discuss the details.

Watch out. The mit belongs to the whole item — not to what follows it, and not to nothing. If it were the initial part of the next element, vāri would not end in n, and there would be no lengthening in vārīṇi. If it belonged to nothing, vaham would not be a pada ending in m, and there would be no anusvāra in vahaṃlihaḥ. The Mahābhāṣya puts it in two words: samudāyabhakto mit, "the mit belongs to the aggregate". Bhaṭṭoji will say the same of nUM later: prescribed for the stem, it is a part of the stem.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

'अच' इति षष्ठ्यन्तम् । अचां मध्ये योऽन्त्यस्तस्मात्परस्तस्यैवान्तावयवो मित्स्यात् ॥

"acaḥ" is a genitive-ending form. [An augment] marked with m comes after that which is last among the vowels [of the element concerned], and is the final part of that very [element].

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 20

—मिदचोऽन्त्यात्परः । स्थानेयोगलस्य ‘प्रत्ययः’ ‘परश्व’ इति परलस्य चायमपवादः । यशांसि, वनानि, ‘नपुंसकस्य झलचः’ इति नुम् । रुणद्धि, ‘रुधादिभ्यः श्रम्’ । ननु पूर्वयोगवदयमपि पुरस्तादपवादन्यायेन स्थानेयोगमात्रस्यापवादोऽस्त्विति चेन्न । वाध्यसामान्य-चिन्तामाश्रित्य स्वविषये प्राप्तं सर्वं वाध्यते इतीहाभ्युपगमात्, अन्यथा श्रमो मित्करणं व्यर्थं स्यात् । नच श्रवणार्थं एव मकारः स्यादिति वाच्यम्, ‘तृणह इम्’ इति निर्देशात् ॥—अचां मध्य इति । सूत्रे जात्यभिप्रायेण ‘अचः’ इत्येकवचन-मिति भावः । अचां मध्य इति किम्, मुञ्चति लुम्पति । ‘अन्त्यादचः परो मित्स्यात्’ इति प्राचो व्याख्यायां नैतत्सिध्येत् । ‘शे मुचादीनाम्’ इत्यत्रान्त्यस्याचोऽसंभवेन मित्परिभाषाया अनुपस्थितिप्रसङ्गात् ॥ अन्ये तु अचोऽन्त्यात्परो मित्स्यादिति व्यत्यासेन योजयित्वा प्राचो व्याख्यानमपि कथंचित्समर्थयन्ते ॥ पूर्वसूत्रादन्त इत्यनुवर्तते, एकदेशे स्वरितत्वप्रतिज्ञानादतो व्याचष्टे—अन्तावयव इति । तेन वारीणीत्यादावङ्गस्य नान्तत्वेन दीर्घः सिद्धः । परादित्वे स न सिध्येत् । अभक्तत्वे तु वहंलिह इत्यत्र ‘वहाभ्रे लिहः’ इति खशि ‘अरुद्विषत्—’ इति मुमि मोऽनुस्वारो न स्यादपदान्तत्वादिति भावः ॥ यत्तु कैश्चिदुक्तमभक्तले वारीणीति दीर्घो न स्यादिति, तत् 'तदादिग्रहणं स्यादिनुमर्थम्' इति अङ्गसंज्ञासूत्रस्थवातिकेनैव दूषितप्रायाम्

Bālamanoramā

मिदचोऽन्त्यात्परः - मिदचोऽन्त्यात्परः । मकार इत् यस्य स मित् अन्त्यादचः परो भवतीत्यर्थे 'शेमुचादीनाम्' इत्यादाविदं न प्रवर्तेत,तत्रान्त्यस्याचोऽभावादत आह — अचेति षष्ठन्तमिति ।यतश्च निर्धारणमित्यनेने॑ति शेषः । 'अच' इत्येकत्वमविवक्षितं, तदाह — अचां मध्य इत्यादिना । अन्तावयव इति । एतच्च आद्यान्तावित्यतोऽन्तग्रहणानुवृत्त्या लभ्यते, आद्यन्तशब्दैकदेशस्यान्तशब्दस्य तन्मात्रे स्वरितत्वप्रतिज्ञाबलेनाऽनुवृत्तिसंभवात् । आदिग्रहणमनुवत्र्य परादित्वाभ्युपगमे तु वारीणीति बहुवचने सर्वनामस्थाने चासंम्बुद्धौइति नान्ताङ्गस्य विहितो दीर्घो न सिध्येत् । अभक्तत्वे तु वहंलिह इत्यत्र 'वहाभ्रे लिहः' इति खशि,अरुर्द्विष॑दिति मुमि तस्य 'मोऽनुस्वारः' इति मान्तस्य पदस्य विहितोऽनुस्वारो न स्यात् । वस्तुतस्तु यस्य समुदायस्य मिद्विहितस्तस्याऽचां मध्ये योऽन्त्यस्तस्य समुदायस्याऽन्तावयवय इति व्याख्येयम् । अत एव 'समुदायभक्तो मित्' इति भाष्यं सङ्गच्छते । समासाश्रयविधौ मूकारश्च वक्ष्यति — ॒अङ्गस्य नुम्विधानात्तद्भक्तो हि नु॑मिति ।

mid aco 'ntyāt paraḥ — mid aco 'ntyāt paraḥ. That which has the letter m as it is mit. If the meaning were [simply] "a mit comes after the last ac" [with "acaḥ" taken as ablative], this [rule] would not operate in [the domain of] "śe mucādīnām" [A 7.1.59] and the like, because no last ac would be available there; anticipating this he says: "'aca' is a genitive-ending form." Supply: "[the genitive being] by yataś ca nirdhāraṇam" [A 2.3.41, the genitive of specification out of a group]. The singular in "acaḥ" is not intended as significant; he conveys this with "acāṃ madhye" ("among the vowels") and the rest. "antāvayavaḥ" ("final part"): this is obtained by the anuvṛtti of the word "anta" from "ādyantau [ṭakitau]" [A 1.1.46] — the anuvṛtti of one portion of the word "ādyanta", namely the word "anta", by itself being possible on the strength of the declaration of svarita [the svaritatva-pratijñā, marking terms for anuvṛtti] upon just that portion. If instead the word "ādi" were carried forward and the mit were accepted as the initial [part] of what follows (parādi), then in "vārīṇi", in the [neuter] plural, the lengthening prescribed for an n-final aṅga by "sarvanāmasthāne cāsambuddhau" [A 6.4.8] would not be achieved [since the aṅga would then not end in n]. And if it belonged to nothing (abhakta), then in "vahaṃlihaḥ" — [formed] with [the affix] KHaŚ by "vahābhre lihaḥ" [A 3.2.32] and with [the augment] mUM by "arur dviṣad-" [A 6.3.67] — the anusvāra prescribed by "mo 'nusvāraḥ" [A 8.3.23] for a pada ending in m would not arise. But in truth the explanation should be given thus: [the mit] is the final part of that aggregate (samudāya) for which the mit is prescribed, [placed] after whichever is last among the vowels of that aggregate. It is precisely thus that the Bhāṣya [dictum] "the mit belongs to the aggregate" (samudāyabhakto mit) coheres. And with reference to a rule that rests on a compound, the author of the mūla [text, Bhaṭṭoji] will say: "since nUM is prescribed for the aṅga, nUM is indeed a part of it (tadbhakta)."

translator notes

textual The digital source reads "mūkāraś ca vakṣyati"; "mūlakāraś ca" ("and the author of the mūla text will say") is presumably intended, and the translation follows that correction. The source also reads "anuvatrya" for "anuvartya" and "antāvayavaya" for "antāvayavaḥ"; the translation follows the evidently intended readings.

SK 38 · A 1.1.49षष्ठीविभक्तिनिर्णयपरिभाषा

षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा ॥ ३८ ॥

ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā

ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā — A genitive (ṣaṣṭhī) [in a rule of this grammar] is sthāneyogā: it is to be construed in the sense of sthāna, i.e., 'in the place of [the item denoted]'.

Rule. A genitive in a sūtra, when its relation has not been otherwise determined, is connected with sthāna: "of X" means "in the place of X". And sthāna here means prasaṅga: the occasion on which X was due to occur. Two names go with this. What was due to occur and is turned back is the sthānin; what turns it back is the ādeśa, the substitute. So in iko yaṇ aci the genitive ikaḥ means: where an ik was due, a yaṇ occurs instead.

Example.

dadhi + atra → the i is an ik, and it is due to stand before the vowel a → ikaḥ says "in place of the ik": the i is the sthānin → a yaṇ comes as its ādeśa (which of the four, SK 39) → the i is removed and y stands in its place → dadhy atra.

Applies when / blocked by. Only for a genitive whose relation is not already fixed. In ūdupadhāyā gohaḥ (A 6.4.89) the word upadhā, "penult", fixes the genitive gohaḥ as a partitive genitive: "ū for the penult of goh". There is no sthāna-sense there; if there were, ū would come in place of the final sound of goh (SK 42), and in place of any penult whatever. A paribhāṣā restricts only where nothing has yet been decided.

Watch out. In ordinary speech sthāna means a place one occupies, as in "Kailāsa is the sthāna of Śiva". If the sūtra meant that, yaṇ would come "in the location of the ik", and the ik would stay put with y beside it. That is why Bhaṭṭoji glosses sthāna as prasaṅga. His commentators illustrate the sense from a ritual injunction — "where darbha grass would be in place, strew śara reeds": the darbha is displaced by the reeds, and just so the i by the y. They also cite the Mahābhāṣya: between one word and another there are only three relations, immediate sequence, proximity and prasaṅga, and this sūtra chooses the third. Scholars discuss how exactly the word sthāne is built into the sūtra.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अनिर्धारितसम्बन्धविशेषा षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा बोध्या । स्थानं च प्रसङ्गः ॥

A genitive whose particular relation has not been [otherwise] determined is to be understood as sthāneyogā — connected with sthāna ('place'). And sthāna [here] means prasaṅga (the occasion on which something would apply).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 20

—षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा । स्थानेन योगोऽस्या इति विग्रहः, निपातनादेत्यम् । षष्ठ्याः संवन्धमात्रवाचित्वेऽपीह शास्त्रे या षष्ठी सा स्थानेयोगा बोध्या ॥ किमविशेषेण, नेत्याह—अनिर्धारितसंवन्धविशेषेति । अनिर्धारितेति किम्, 'ऊढुपधाया गोहः', 'शास इदङ्हलोः' इत्यादानुपधासंनिधानेनावयवषष्ठीत्वे निर्णीते गोहः शास इत्यादौ मा भूत् । सति हि तत्रापि स्थानेयोगत्वे गोहिशासिस्थाने धानुमात्रस्योपधायाश्च स्थाने ऊढितौ स्यातामिति दिक् ॥— स्थानं च प्रसङ्ग इति । न चास्य प्रसङ्गार्थकत्वे विवदितव्यम् । 'दर्भाणां स्थाने शरैः प्रस्तरितव्यम्' इत्युक्ते दर्भाणां प्रसङ्ग इति प्रतीतेः ॥ एवंच 'इको यणचि' इत्यादाविगुच्चारणप्रसक्तौ यणुच्चारणीय इत्याद्यर्थः संपद्येत

Bālamanoramā

षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा - षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा । स्थानं प्रसङ्ग इति वक्ष्यति । तस्मिन् वाचकतया योगो यस्याः सा स्थानेयोगा । निपातनात्सप्तम्या अलुक् । स्थानेन योगो यस्या इति वा विग्रहः । निपातनादेत्वम् ।इको यणची॑त्यादौ षष्ठी स्थानरूपसम्बन्धार्थिकेत्यर्थः । लोके तावदेकशतं षष्टर्था आर्था यौना मौखाः रुआऔवाश्च । शब्दस्य शब्देन त्रय एव संबन्धाः — आनन्तर्यं सामीप्यं प्रसङ्गश्चेति । तत्रान्यतमार्थनिर्धारणार्थमिदं सूत्रमिति भाष्यम् । ततश्च॒इको यणची॑त्यादौ 'इक' इति षष्टआ स्थानमुच्यते । तस्मिन् प्रकृत्यर्थ इक् निरूपकतयाऽन्वेति । अचि परत इकः प्रसङ्गे यण् स्यादिति । विवरणवाक्ये त्वस्मिन् 'इक' इति षष्ठी निरूपकतायामिति न पुनरुक्तिः शङ्काः । यता — ॒देवदत्तस्यावयवः पाणि॑रिति । 'ऊदुपधाया गोहः' इत्यत्र तु 'गोह' इति षष्ठी न स्थानार्थिका, उपपधापदसमभिव्याहारेणाऽवयवषष्ठीत्वनिर्धारणात्, परिभाषाणां चाऽनियमे नियमनार्थमेव प्रवृत्तेः । तदेतदाह-अनिर्धारितेत्यादिना । अनिर्धारितः सम्बन्धविशेषो यस्या इति विग्रहः । तदेवमुदाहृतप्रकृतभाष्यरीत्या॒इको यणची॑त्यादौ षष्ठी स्थानरूपसंबन्धविशेषार्थिकेति स्थितम् ।ष मतुप्सूत्रभाष्ये त्वनन्तरादयो न षष्ठर्था इति स्थितम् । एवं सति स्थाने इति सप्तम्यन्तपदेन योगो यस्या इति विग्रहे स्थाने इति सप्तम्यन्तस्यानुकरणम् । षष्ठीश्रुतौ 'स्थाने' इति सप्तम्यन्तं पदमुपतिष्ठत इति फलति । स्थानेन स्थानपदार्थेन योगो यस्या इति तृतीयान्तविग्रहे त्वध्याह्मतस्थानपदार्थनिरूपितसंबन्धार्थिकेत्यर्थः ।अस्तेर्भूर्भवतीति सन्देहः स्थाने अनन्तरे समीपे इति॑ इत्यादिप्रकृतसूत्रभाष्यस्य तु अस्तेरनन्तरे इत्यध्याह्मतानन्तरादिपदार्थनिरूपितसम्बन्धे षष्ठीत्येवार्थः । अनन्तरादीनां षष्ठर्थत्वं तु नास्त्येवेति प्रौढमनोरमायां हलन्त्यमिति सूत्रे स्थितम् । तद्व्याख्याने च शब्दरत्ने शब्देन्दुशेखरे च बहुधा प्रपञ्चितम् । अनिर्धारितेति किम् । ऊदुपधाया॑ इत्यत्र 'गोह' इति षष्ठ्याः स्थानार्थकत्वं मा भूत् । सति तु तत्रापि स्थानार्थकत्वे, गोहोऽन्त्यस्य उपधामात्रस्य च ऊत् स्यात् । ननु स्थानशब्द आधारवाची लोके प्रसिद्धः । यथा शिवस्थानं कैलासः, विष्णुस्थानं वैकुण्ठमित्यादौ । एवं च इको यणचीत्यादौ षष्ठ्याः स्थानार्थकत्वे प्रकृत्यर्थस्य तत्र निरूपकत्वेऽभेदेन वा अन्वये सति इकोऽधिकरणे यण् स्यादिति इगधिकरणको यण् स्यादिति वाऽर्थः स्यात् । तत इको निवृत्तिर्न स्यादित्यत आह — स्थानं च प्रसङ्ग इति । क्वचिदाभिचारेष्टौदर्भाणां स्थाने शरैःप्रस्तरितव्य॑मित्यत्र स्थानशब्दस्य प्रसङ्गे दर्शनादिति भावः । एवं च तत्र यथा शरैर्दर्भा निवत्र्यन्ते, तद्वदिको यणचीत्यादावपि यणादिभिरिगादयो निवत्र्यन्ते । तत्र च यः प्रसक्तो निवर्तते स स्थानीति व्यवह्यियते, यो निवर्तयति स आदेश इति ।

ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā — He will state [below] that sthāna means prasaṅga. That [genitive] whose yoga (connection) with it [i.e., with sthāna] consists in expressing it (vācakatayā) is sthāneyogā. The non-elision (aluk) of the locative ending [in the compound sthāne-yogā] is by nipātana (irregular fixation). Or the analysis is: 'that which has connection with sthāna' [with an instrumental, sthānena]; the e [in sthāne- for sthāna-] is then by nipātana. The meaning is that in iko yaṇ aci (A 6.1.77) and the like, the genitive has for its meaning the relation in the form of sthāna.

In ordinary usage, to begin with, there are a hundred and one meanings of the genitive — relations based on property (ārtha), on marriage-alliance (yauna), on the mouth (maukha), and on the sacrificial ladle (srauva). But of one word with another word there are only three relations: immediate sequence (ānantarya), proximity (sāmīpya), and prasaṅga. This sūtra serves to determine [the genitive] in one of those [three] senses — so the Bhāṣya. Accordingly, in iko yaṇ aci and the like, by the genitive ikaḥ the sthāna is stated, and the stem-meaning ik construes with that [sthāna] as its determinant (nirūpaka): 'when an ac follows, on the prasaṅga of ik — where ik would be in place — yaṇ occurs.' And in this paraphrase-sentence the genitive in ikaḥ [expresses] determinant-hood (nirūpakatā), so no redundancy [with the separately stated prasaṅga] should be suspected — just as in 'the hand is a limb of Devadatta (devadattasya avayavaḥ pāṇiḥ)'.

In ūdupadhāyā gohaḥ (A 6.4.89), on the other hand, the genitive gohaḥ is not in the sense of sthāna, because through its co-occurrence with the word upadhā ('penult') it is determined to be a partitive genitive (avayava-ṣaṣṭhī), and because paribhāṣās operate only to impose a restriction where there is no [prior] determination. This is what [Bhaṭṭoji] states with 'anirdhārita-' etc.; the analysis is 'that [genitive] whose particular relation is undetermined'. Thus, by the method of the Bhāṣya on the present rule as just cited, it stands settled that in iko yaṇ aci and the like the genitive has for its meaning the particular relation in the form of sthāna. In the Bhāṣya on the matUP sūtra (A 5.2.94), moreover, it stands settled that ānantarya and the rest are not meanings of the genitive.

This being so, if the analysis is 'that which has yoga with [the word] sthāne, a word ending in the seventh (locative) case', then sthāne is an imitative mention (anukaraṇa) of the locative-ending form. The upshot is: wherever a genitive is heard [in a sūtra], the locative-ending word sthāne presents itself [as supplied]. But on the instrumental analysis — 'that which has yoga with sthāna, i.e., with the meaning of the word sthāna' — the sense is that [the genitive] has for its meaning a relation determined by the supplied (adhyāhṛta) meaning of the word sthāna. As for the Bhāṣya passage on the present sūtra, 'asteḥ bhūḥ bhavati — there is doubt: in its place (sthāne)? immediately after it (anantare)? near it (samīpe)?' — its meaning is simply that [on those alternatives] the genitive [in asteḥ] would stand in a relation determined by the supplied meaning of anantara and the rest. That ānantarya and the rest are, however, not meanings of the genitive at all stands settled in the Prauḍhamanoramā under the sūtra halantyam (A 1.3.3), and is elaborated at length in its commentary the Śabdaratna and in the Śabdenduśekhara.

Why [say] 'whose particular relation is undetermined'? So that in ūdupadhāyāḥ [gohaḥ] the genitive gohaḥ should not bear the sense of sthāna. For if it bore the sthāna-sense even there, ū would come in the place of the final of goh and in the place of a mere penult [in general].

Objection: the word sthāna is well known in ordinary usage as denoting a locus (ādhāra), as in 'Kailāsa is the sthāna (abode) of Śiva', 'Vaikuṇṭha is the sthāna of Viṣṇu'. On that understanding, if in iko yaṇ aci the genitive bore the sense of sthāna, then — whether the stem-meaning construes with it as its determinant or by identity — the meaning would be either 'yaṇ occurs in the locus of ik' or 'yaṇ occurs having ik for its locus'; and in that case there would be no removal of the ik [the ik would remain, with yaṇ merely resting on it]. Anticipating this he says: and sthāna means prasaṅga. The idea is that the word sthāna is [in fact] found in the sense of prasaṅga, as in the injunction concerning a certain sorcery-offering (ābhicāra-iṣṭi): 'where darbha grass would be in place (sthāne), the strewing is to be done with śara reeds.' And so, just as there the darbha blades are displaced by the śara reeds, in the same way in iko yaṇ aci and the like the ik vowels and the rest are displaced by yaṇ and the rest. And in that situation, what was due to occur (prasakta) and is turned back is termed the sthānin; what turns it back is termed the ādeśa (substitute).

translator notes

textual The digital source is corrupt in places: 'षष्टर्था' for expected ṣaṣṭhyarthāḥ; 'रुआऔवाश्च' apparently for śrauvāś/srauvāś ca (the sacrificial-ladle relation); 'शङ्काः' for expected śaṅkyā; 'उपपधा' for upadhā; a stray 'ष' before 'मतुप्सूत्रभाष्ये'; 'यता' for yathā; 'अध्याह्मत' for adhyāhṛta. The translation follows the evidently intended readings; no emendation is silently adopted beyond these obvious digitization errors.
translator The clause beginning loke tāvad ekaśataṁ ṣaṣṭhyarthāḥ compresses a Bhāṣya discussion; ārtha, yauna, maukha, and srauva are the traditional classes of worldly relations (through property, marriage, the mouth, and the ladle, i.e., co-sacrifice). The glosses in parentheses are the translator's.

SK 39 · A 1.1.50आदेशचयननिर्णयपरिभाषा

स्थानेऽन्तरतमः ॥ ३९ ॥

sthāne'ntaratamaḥ

sthāne 'ntaratamaḥ — When [substitution is due] in a place (sthāne, i.e., when there is prasaṅga), the most similar (antaratama) [candidate] is the substitute.

Rule. When something is due to be replaced (sthāne, again in the sense of prasaṅga), and more than one substitute is in prospect for the one sthānin, the one most like the sthānin (antaratama, "most similar") becomes the substitute. Likeness is measured in four ways: sthāna, place of articulation; artha, meaning; guṇa, effort of articulation; pramāṇa, measure, one mātrā or two. Bhaṭṭoji adds a paribhāṣā: where likeness of more than one kind is possible, likeness by sthāna is the stronger.

Example. One case of each kind.

Place: dadhi + atra → the sthānin i is palatal → of the yaṇ sounds y, v, r, l, the palatal one is y → dadhy atra.

Meaning: kroṣṭu → tṛjvat kroṣṭuḥ (A 7.1.95) gives the u-final word kroṣṭu a substitute ending in the affix tṛC → among such words the one with the same meaning, kroṣṭṛ, is chosen → kroṣṭṛ-.

Effort: vāg + hariḥ → the sthānin h has the external efforts ghoṣa, nāda, saṃvāra and mahāprāṇa (chapter 1, SK 12) → the substitute must be savarṇa with the preceding g, so it is one of k, kh, g, gh, ṅ → k has śvāsa, aghoṣa, vivāra and alpaprāṇa, sharing nothing; kh shares only mahāprāṇa; g and ṅ share three efforts but lack mahāprāṇa; gh shares all four → vāg ghariḥ.

Measure: adas → adaso 'ser dād u do maḥ (A 8.2.80) replaces a vowel of adas → for a short vowel the substitute is u, for a long one ū.

Place beats measure: ci + tā, stu + tā → sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ (A 7.3.84) prescribes guṇa for the i and for the u → guṇa is a, e or o (SK 17) → by measure a is nearest, one mātrā like i and u; by place e shares the palate with i and o shares the lips with u → place is the stronger → cetā, stotā.

Applies when / blocked by. The superlative ending -tama in antaratama is what excludes the near-misses. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators raise the objection themselves: why not g, or ṅ, which agree with h in three efforts? Because only gh agrees in all four, so only gh is similar in the highest degree. And for this nearness, sameness of place in some respect is enough: e counts as sharing place with i although it also has the throat. Total sameness of place is required only for the name savarṇa (SK 10), not here.

Watch out. The word sthāna is used in two senses in this chapter. In this sūtra as written it means prasaṅga, as in SK 38. But the word sthāne also comes down from SK 38 by anuvṛtti (its svarita marks it for that, SK 46), and read a second time inside this sūtra, with its ending changed to the instrumental, it means place of articulation: "most similar by place". That second sentence is the paribhāṣā "likeness by sthāna is the stronger".

Siddhānta-kaumudī

प्रसङ्गे सति सदृशतम आदेशः स्यात् । [(परिभाषा - ) यत्रानेकविधमान्तर्यं तत्र स्थानत आन्तर्यं बलीयः] ॥

When there is prasaṅga [i.e., when something is due to be replaced], the most similar one (sadṛśatama) is the ādeśa (substitute). (paribhāṣā) "Where the similarity (āntarya) is of more than one kind, there similarity by sthāna (place of articulation) is the stronger."

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 20

—स्थाने—॥— सदृशेतम इति । अर्थात्प्राप्यमाणानां मध्य एव । अतएव गङ्गोदकमित्यत्र त्रिमात्र ओकारो न ॥ इहस्थाने इत्यनुवर्तमाने पुनः स्थानग्रहणादन्योऽपि वाक्यार्थः संमतः । ताल्वादिरूपे स्थाने योऽन्तरतमस्तत्प्रयुक्तान्तर्यवानिति यावत् । स तु प्राप्यमाणानां मध्ये स्यादिति, तदेतदाह—यत्रानेकविधमिति । स्थानार्थगुणप्रमाणतश्चतुर्विधमित्यर्थः ॥ स्थानतो यथा—दध्यत्र । ताल्लस्थानस्येकारस्य ताल्लस्थानो यकारः । अर्थतो यथा—वातण्ड्ययुवतिः, वतण्डशब्दात् 'वतण्डाच्च' इति गोत्रापत्ये यन् । तस्य 'लुक् स्त्रियाम्' इति लुक् । शाङ्गरवादित्वान्डीन् । वतण्डी चासौ युवतिश्चेति विग्रहे 'पोटायुवति—' इत्यादिना समासः, 'पुंवत्कर्मधारय—' इत्यतिदिश्यमानः पुंशब्दो वतण्डापत्यवाचिनो वतण्डीशब्दस्य तदपत्यवाची वातण्ड्यशब्दो भवति न तु वतण्डादिः । गुणतो यथा—वाग्घरिः । घोषवतो महाप्राणस्य तादृश एव घकारः । प्रमाणतो यथा— अभुम् अमू अमून्, 'अदसोऽसेः—' इत्यनेन हस्वस्य हस्वो दीर्घस्य दीर्घ उकारः ॥ तमव्यग्रहणं किम् । वाग्घरिरित्यत्र 'झयो होऽन्यतरस्याम्' इति पूर्वसवर्णे क्रियमाणे महाप्राणलसाम्येन द्वितीयो नादवत्त्वसाम्येन तृतीयश्च मा भूत् । किंतु नादवान् महाप्राणश्चतुर्थो घ एव यथा स्यादिति ॥—वलीय इति । तेन चेता स्तोतेत्यत्र प्रमाणत आन्तर्यवानकारो नेति भावः

Bālamanoramā

स्थानेऽन्तरतमः - स्थानेऽन्तरतमः । 'स्थानं प्रसङ्ग' इत्युक्तम् । अन्तरशब्दोऽत्र सदृशपर्यायः, अतिशयतोऽन्तरोऽन्तरतमः । तदाह — प्रसङ्गे सतीत्यादिना । एकस्य स्थानिनोऽनेकादेशप्रसङ्गे सति यः स्थानार्थगुणप्रमाणतः स्थानिना सदृशतमः स एवादेशो भवतीत्यर्थः । अत्र स्थानशब्देन ताल्वादिस्थानं विवक्षितम् । गुणशब्देन प्रयत्नः । प्रमाणशब्देन एकद्विमात्रादिपरिमाणम् । तत्र स्थानतो यथा — दध्यत्र । तालुस्थानकस्य इकारस्य तालुस्थानको यकारः । अर्थतो यथा — तृज्वत्क्रोष्टुरिति क्रोष्टुशब्दस्य उकारान्तस्य तृजन्त आदेशो भवन्नर्थसाम्यात् क्रोष्टृशब्द एव तृजन्त आदेशो भवति । गुणतो यथा — वाग्घरिः । अत्र हकारः स्थानी घोषनादसंवारमहाप्राणप्रयत्नवान् । तस्य गकारसवर्णो भवंश्चतुर्थो घकारो भवति, तस्य हकारेण स्थानिना घोषनादसंवारमहाप्राणप्रयत्नसाम्यात् । ककारस्तु न भवति, तस्य आआसाऽघोषविवाराल्पप्राणप्रयत्नकत्वात् । तथा खकारोऽपि द्वितीयो न भवति, तस्य महाप्राणप्रयत्नसाम्येऽपि आआसाऽघोषविवारप्रयत्नभेदात् । तथा तृतीयो ।ञपि गकारो न भवति, तस्य घोषनादसंवारप्रयत्नसाम्येऽपि निना हकारेण आआसाऽघोषविवारप्रयत्नबेदे सत्यपि महाप्राणप्रयत्नसाम्यसत्त्वात् , तथा तृतीयो वा गकारः कुतो न स्यात्, तस्य स्थानिना हकारेण अल्पप्राणप्रयत्नभेदेऽपि घोषनादसंवारप्रयत्नसाम्यसत्त्वात् । अत एव ङकारो वा कुतो न स्यादिति चेन्न ,तमब्ग्रहणेन उक्तातिप्रसङ्गनिरासात् । अतिशयितो ह्रन्तरोऽन्तरतमः । अतिशयितं च प्रयत्नतः सादृश्यं हकारेण घकारस्यैव, उभयोरपि घोषनादसंवारमहाप्राणात्मकप्रयत्नचतुष्टयसाम्येन सादृश्यातिशयसत्त्वात् । खकारस्य महाप्राणप्रयत्नसाम्येऽपि घोषनादसंवारप्रयत्नविरहात् । गङयोः घोषनादसंवारप्रयत्नसाम्येऽपि महाप्राणप्रयत्नविरहात् । प्रमाणतो यथा — ॒अदसोऽसोर्दादुदोमः॑ इति । ह्रस्वस्य उकारो दीर्घस्य ऊकारः । नन्वेवमपि चेता स्तोतेत्यत्र इकारस्य उकारस्य च सार्वाधातुकार्धधातुकयोरिति गुणो भवन् प्रमाणत आन्तर्यवानकारः कुतो न स्यादित्यत आह — यत्रेति । तेन इकारस्य एकार उकारस्य ओकारश्च गुणो भवति, स्थानसाम्यात्, न त्वकारः, स्थानभेदात् । नच इकारेण एकारस्य, उकारेण ओकारस्य कथं स्थानसाम्यम् । एकारस्य ओकारस्य च कण्ठस्थानाधिक्यादिति वाच्यं, यावत्स्थानसाम्यस्य सावण्र्यप्रयोजकत्वेऽपि आन्तरतम्यपरीक्षायां कथञ्चित्स्थानसाम्यस्यैव प्रयोजकत्वात् । अत्र सूत्रे पूर्वसूत्रात्स्थानेग्रहणमनुवर्तते, एकदेशे स्वरितत्वप्रतिज्ञाबलात् । तृतीयान्तं च विपरिणम्यते । अनुवर्त्त्यमानस्चायंस्थान॑शब्दः पूर्वंसूत्रे प्रसङ्गपरोऽप्यत्र ताल्वाद्यन्तयतमस्थानपरः, शब्दाधिकाराश्रयणात् । 'अन्तरतम' इत्यपि तेन संबध्यते । ततश्च 'स्थानेनाऽन्तरतम' इति वाक्यान्तरं संपद्यते । सति संभवे ताल्वादिस्थानत एवान्तरतमो भवतीत्यर्थः । ततश्चयत्रानेकविधमान्तर्यं तत्र स्थानत एवान्तर्यं बलीय॑ इति (सिद्धं) भवति ।

sthāne 'ntaratamaḥ — It has [already] been said that sthāna means prasaṅga. The word antara here is a synonym of sadṛśa ('similar'); antaratama is what is similar in the highest degree. He states this with 'when there is prasaṅga' etc. The meaning: when, for a single sthānin, more than one ādeśa is in prospect, only that one becomes the ādeśa which is most similar to the sthānin in respect of sthāna, artha, guṇa, or pramāṇa. Here by the word sthāna is meant the place of articulation, palate and the rest; by the word guṇa, the [articulatory] effort (prayatna); by the word pramāṇa, the measure of one mora, two morae, and so on.

Of these, [similarity] by sthāna, for example: dadhy atra — for the palatal i, the palatal y. By artha, for example: under tṛjvat kroṣṭuḥ (A 7.1.95), when the u-final word kroṣṭu is to receive a tṛC-final substitute, it is precisely the word kroṣṭṛ, ending in tṛC, that becomes the substitute, by sameness of meaning. By guṇa, for example: vāg ghariḥ. Here the sthānin h possesses the efforts voiced (ghoṣa), resonant (nāda), closed (saṁvāra), and aspirate (mahāprāṇa). What comes in as savarṇa with [the preceding] g is the fourth letter, gh, because gh shares with the sthānin h the efforts ghoṣa, nāda, saṁvāra, and mahāprāṇa. k does not occur, since k has the efforts breathed (śvāsa), unvoiced (aghoṣa), open (vivāra), and unaspirated (alpaprāṇa). Likewise the second letter, kh, does not occur either: though it agrees in the effort mahāprāṇa, it differs in the efforts śvāsa, aghoṣa, and vivāra. Likewise the third letter, g, also does not occur: though it agrees in the efforts ghoṣa, nāda, and saṁvāra, [gh prevails,] since [gh] possesses sameness with the sthānin h in the mahāprāṇa effort as well.

Objection: then why should not the third letter, g, be [the substitute], since — despite its difference from the sthānin h in the alpaprāṇa effort — it does possess sameness in the efforts ghoṣa, nāda, and saṁvāra? And for that very reason, why not ṅ? If this is urged — no: by the use of [the superlative suffix] tamaP [in antaratamaḥ] the over-extension just stated is ruled out. For antaratama means similar in surpassing degree (atiśayita); and surpassing similarity in effort with h belongs to gh alone, since the two share the tetrad of efforts ghoṣa, nāda, saṁvāra, and mahāprāṇa and so possess the highest degree of similarity — whereas kh, though it agrees in the mahāprāṇa effort, lacks the efforts ghoṣa, nāda, and saṁvāra, and g and ṅ, though they agree in the efforts ghoṣa, nāda, and saṁvāra, lack the mahāprāṇa effort.

By pramāṇa, for example: under adaso 'ser dād u do maḥ (A 8.2.80) — for a short [vowel of adas] the substitute is u, for a long one, ū.

Objection: even so, in cetā and stotā, when guṇa comes by sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ (A 7.3.84) for the i [of ci] and the u [of stu], why should not a, which is closest by measure (pramāṇa), be [the substitute]? Anticipating this he says 'where…' [i.e., the paribhāṣā]. By that [paribhāṣā], the guṇa of i is e and of u is o, by sameness of sthāna — and not a, because of difference of sthāna. Nor may it be objected: 'How can e have sameness of sthāna with i, or o with u, since e and o have the throat (kaṇṭha) as an additional place?' For although it is total sameness of sthāna that conditions savarṇa-hood (sāvarṇya), in the examination of closest similarity (āntaratamya) it is sameness of sthāna in some respect that is operative.

Into this sūtra the mention of sthāna is carried forward (anuvṛtti) from the preceding sūtra, on the strength of the acknowledged svarita-marking on that one portion [signalling its continuance]; and it is transformed (vipariṇāma) into an instrumental ending. And this word sthāna, though in the preceding sūtra it refers to prasaṅga, here as carried forward refers to one or another of the places of articulation, palate and the rest, because recourse is had to the governing topic of [speech-]sound (śabda). 'antaratama' too construes with it, so that a second sentence results: sthānena antaratamaḥ — 'the most similar by place of articulation'. The meaning: where that is possible, the antaratama is [determined] precisely by the place of articulation, palate and the rest. And thus [the paribhāṣā] 'where the similarity is of more than one kind, there similarity by sthāna alone is the stronger' is (established).

translator notes

textual The digital source repeatedly reads 'आआसा-' for expected श्वासा- (śvāsa-, the 'breathed' effort); the translation restores śvāsa. The sentence 'तथा तृतीयो ।ञपि गकारो न भवति … निना हकारेण आआसाऽघोषविवारप्रयत्नबेदे सत्यपि महाप्राणप्रयत्नसाम्यसत्त्वात्' is disturbed ('निना' apparently for स्थानिना, 'बेदे' for भेदे, and the śvāsa-clause is out of place, since gh does not differ from h in those efforts); the translation gives the evident intended sense — that gh outranks g by sharing all four efforts including mahāprāṇa — which the sequel ('गङयोः … महाप्राणप्रयत्नविरहात्') confirms. Also 'ताल्वाद्यन्तयतमस्थानपरः' is taken as tālv-ādy-anyatama-sthāna-paraḥ, and 'सार्वाधातुक-' as sārvadhātuka-.
textual The source pratīka reads 'adaso 'sor…' where the standard text of A 8.2.80 is 'adaso 'ser dād u do maḥ'; the English follows the standard wording. The suspicious source reading is preserved in the source and noted here.
translator The second sentence stands in the source inside square brackets with the label '(paribhāṣā —)', marking it as a quoted paribhāṣā rather than Bhaṭṭoji's own prose; the label is reproduced in the translation. The same wording is derived at the end of the Bālamanoramā on this unit.
translator In 'tasya gakāra-savarṇo bhavan' the requirement that the substitute for h be savarṇa with the preceding g comes from the jhaya rule under which vāg ghariḥ is formed; the commentary presupposes it without citing it, and no reference is supplied here.

SK 40 · A 1.1.66सप्तमीविभक्तिनिर्णयपरिभाषा

तस्मिन्निति निर्दिष्टे पूर्वस्य ॥ ४० ॥

tasminniti nirdiṣṭe pūrvasya

tasminn iti nirdiṣṭe pūrvasya — When [a condition] is designated by 'tasmin' (a locative), [the operation applies] to what precedes [it immediately].

Rule. When a rule's condition is stated in the locative — "when X" — the operation applies to the element immediately before X, with no other sound between. The sūtra's tasmin does not mean itself; it imitates the locative words of other sūtras, aci, hali and the like. Nirdiṣṭa means "uttered without a break" (nir, without a gap; diś, to utter): the X must be uttered, in actual speech, right after the element that changes.

Example.

dadhi + atra → the condition of iko yaṇ aci is aci, "when a vowel" → the a of atra is uttered right after the i → the operation falls on the element immediately before that a, the i → dadhy atra.

samidham → the a of the ending stands after the i of -idh-, but the dh lies between → that i is not immediately before the a → no yaṇ for that i.

dadhi udakam → the u of udakam stands next to the vowel i, but after it → a locative condition looks backward only → the u is not replaced on account of the i.

Applies when / blocked by. Without this rule, aci could only be read as "when a vowel is present" (a locative absolute, sati-saptamī), because one vowel cannot literally be the place of another sound; and then yaṇ would apply across a gap and forwards, giving the two wrong results above. Only separation by another sound is barred, not separation by time. A pause is excluded separately, by the saṃhitā heading (SK 28); rules outside that heading, such as ānaṅ ṛto dvandve (A 6.3.25) and devatādvandve ca (A 6.3.26), act even across a pause, as when agnāviṣṇū is recited with a break (avagraha) between its members. The rule does not operate where the locative names a meaning rather than a sound, as in atiśāyane tamap (A 5.3.55); nor in certain rules of syntax such as kartṛkarmaṇoḥ kṛti (A 2.3.65), in deference to actual usage. Scholars discuss these cases, and whether the word nirdiṣṭa is needed at all.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

सप्तमीनिर्देशेन विधीयमानं कार्यं वर्णान्तरेणाव्यवहितस्य पूर्वस्य बोध्यम् ॥

An operation prescribed by means of a locative designation is to be understood as applying to that preceding element which is not separated [from the locative-designated item] by any other varṇa (sound).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 20–21

— तस्मिन्निति । सप्तम्यन्तानुकरणमिदम् । निःशब्दो नैरन्तर्यपरः दिशिरुच्चारणक्रियः । अचि यणित्युक्ते व्यवहितेऽव्यवहिते च सति प्राप्तमव्यवहिते एवेति पूर्वस्य परस्य च प्राप्तं पूर्वस्यैवेति च नियम्यते । अव्यवहितस्येति तु फलितार्थकथनम् ॥ पूर्वस्यैवेति किम्, दध्युदकम् । अत्रोकारस्य मा भूत् ॥ अव्यवहितस्यैवेति किम्, अग्निचिदत्र सोमसुदत्र । व्यवधानं चात्र वर्णकृतमेव निषिध्यते, न तु कालकृतम् । संहिताधिकाराज्ज्ञापकात् । अन्यथा निर्दिष्टप्रहणादेवासंहितायां यणाद्यप्रसङ्गात्किं तेन संहिताधिकारेणातो व्याचष्टे—वर्णान्तरेणेति । एवं च संहिताधिकारवहिर्भूतविधयः कालव्यवायेऽपि संभवन्तीति । तेनामाविष्णु इत्यादाववग्रहेऽपि ‘आनङ् ऋतो द्वन्द्वे’, ‘देवताद्वन्द्वे च’ इत्यादिना उत्तरपदे परतो विहिता आनङ्गदयो भवन्तीति दिक्

Bālamanoramā

तस्मिन्निति निर्दिष्टे पूर्वस्य - तस्मिन्निति निर्दिष्टे ।इको यणची॑त्यत्र अचि इको यण् स्यादित्यवगतम् । तत्राऽचो वर्णान्तराधिकरणत्वं न संभवतीति सतिसप्तम्याश्रयणीया,-अचि सति इको यण् स्यादिति । तत्र व्यवहितेऽव्यवहिते च इको यण् प्राप्तः । ततश्चसमिध॑मित्यत्र धकारल्यलहितेऽकारे सत्यरि मकारादिकारस्य यण् स्यात् । तथा अचि सति पूर्वस्य परस्य वा इको यण् प्राप्तः । ततश्च दध्युदकमित्यत्र इकारे अचि सति उकारस्य परस्यापि इको यण् स्यात् । तत्राऽव्यवहित एव अचि भवति न व्यवहिते, पूर्वस्यैव भवति न परस्येत्येतदर्थमिदमारभ्यते । तस्मिन्निति न तच्छब्दः स्वरूपपरः । तथा सतितस्मिन्नणि च युष्माकास्माकौ॑ इत्यादावेव प्रवर्तेत, न त्विको यणचीत्यादौ । किन्तु इको यणचीत्यादिसूत्रगतस्याऽचीत्यादिसप्तम्यन्तपदस्यतस्मिन्नि॑त्यनुकरणम् ।इती॑त्यनन्तरं 'गम्येऽर्थे' इति शेषः । निरिति नैरन्तर्ये । दिशिरुच्चारणे । एवं च इको यणचि रायो हलीत्यादिसूत्रेषु इचि हलि इत्येवं सप्तम्यन्तपदगम्येऽर्तेऽकारादौ दध्यत्र सुध्युपास्य इत्यादिप्रयोगदशायां निर्दिष्टेऽव्यवहितोच्चारिते सति पूर्वस्य कार्यं भवति, न तु व्यवहितोच्चारिते नापि परस्येति फलितोऽर्थः । व्यवधान#ं च वर्णान्तरकृतमेव निषिध्यते, नतु कालकृतम् ।इको यणची॑त्यादौ कालकृतव्यवधानस्य संहिताधिकारादेव निरासलाभात्, तत्र कालकृतव्यवधानस्याप्यनेनैव सूत्रेण निरासे संहिताधिकारस्य वैयथ्र्यापातात् । एवं च ये संहिताधिकारबहिर्भूताः 'आनङृतो द्वन्द्वे'देवताद्वन्द्वे च॑ इत्यादय उत्तरपदे परत आनङादिविधयस्ते सर्वे अगनाविष्णू इत्यग्नाविष्णू इत्याद्यवग्रहे कालव्यवधानेऽपि भवन्ति । एतत्सर्वमभिप्रेत्य पर्यवसन्नार्थमाह — सप्तमीनिर्देशेनेत्यादिना । — इति सूत्राक्षरानुयायी पन्थाः ।अतिशयने तम॑बित्यत्र तु नेयं परिभाषा प्रवर्तते, सर्तम्यन्तातिशायनपदार्थस्य शब्दरूपत्वाभावेनाऽव्यवहितोच्चारितत्वरूपनिर्धिष्टत्वाऽसंभवात् । नचैवमपिकर्तृकर्मणोः कृती॑त्यत्रापि अस्याः परिभाषायाः प्रवृत्तौकर्तृषष्ठी कर्मणिषष्ठी च कृष्णस्य कृतिः जगतः कर्ता कृष्ण इत्यत्रैव स्यान्नतु 'कृतिः कृष्णस्य' 'कर्ता जगत' इत्यत्र इति वाच्यं, लक्ष्यानुरोधेन क्वचिदेवंजातीयकेष्वस्याः परिभाषाया अप्रवृत्तिरिति 'श्नान्नलोप' इति सूत्रे भाष्ये प्रपञ्चितत्वात् । वस्तुतस्तु भाष्यानुसारेणाऽत्र सूत्रे निर्दिष्टग्रहणं संहिताधिकारसूत्रं च विफलमेवेति इको यणचीत्यत्र वक्ष्यते ।

tasminn iti nirdiṣṭe pūrvasya — From iko yaṇ aci (A 6.1.77) it is understood that with respect to ac, yaṇ comes in place of ik. There, since it is impossible for an ac to be the locus (adhikaraṇa) of another varṇa, the locative must be taken as a sati-saptamī (locative absolute): 'when an ac is [present], yaṇ comes in place of ik.' On that construal, yaṇ for ik would follow both when [the ac] is separated and when it is unseparated; consequently in samidham, the a being present although separated [from the i] by the dh, yaṇ would [wrongly] come in place of the i that follows the m. Likewise, when an ac is present, yaṇ would follow in place of an ik whether preceding or following; consequently in dadhi udakam, when the ac i [of dadhi] is present, yaṇ would come even in place of the following ik, the u [of udakam]. It is to secure that [the operation] takes effect only when the ac is unseparated, not when it is separated, and only in place of the preceding, not of the following, that this [sūtra] is begun.

In tasmin, the word tat does not refer to its own form (svarūpa). If it did, [the paribhāṣā] would operate only in [sūtras] such as tasminn aṇi ca yuṣmākāsmākau (A 4.3.2) [which actually contain the word tasmin], and not in iko yaṇ aci and the like. Rather, tasmin is an imitative mention (anukaraṇa) of the locative-ending words — aci and the like — occurring in sūtras such as iko yaṇ aci. After iti, the [phrase] 'when the sense [thereof] is understood (gamye 'rthe)' is to be supplied. The [preverb] nir [in nirdiṣṭa] signifies unbroken contiguity (nairantarya); the root diś [signifies] uttering (uccāraṇa). And so the resulting sense is: in sūtras such as iko yaṇ aci and rāyo hali (A 7.2.85), when the item understood from the locative-ending word — aci, hali — namely a and the rest, is, in the actual employment of speech, as in dadhy atra, sudhy upāsya, 'nirdiṣṭa', that is, uttered without separation, the operation falls to the preceding element; not when it is uttered with separation, nor to a following element.

And it is only separation effected by another varṇa that is prohibited, not separation effected by time. For in iko yaṇ aci and the like, the exclusion of time-made separation is obtained from the saṁhitā governing heading (adhikāra) itself; if time-made separation too were excluded there by this very sūtra, the saṁhitā-adhikāra would fall into pointlessness. Accordingly, those prescriptions of ānaṄ and the rest before a following member which lie outside the saṁhitā-adhikāra — ānaṅ ṛto dvandve (A 6.3.25), devatādvandve ca (A 6.3.26), and so on — all take effect even where there is time-made separation, as when agnāviṣṇū is recited with avagraha [a pause between the members]. Intending all this, he states the settled sense with 'by means of a locative designation' etc. — Such is the path that follows the letter of the sūtra.

In atiśāyane tamap (A 5.3.55), however, this paribhāṣā does not operate, because the meaning of the locative-ending word [atiśāyane], not being a linguistic form (śabda), cannot possibly be 'nirdiṣṭa' in the sense of being uttered without separation. Nor may it be objected: 'Even so, if this paribhāṣā operated in kartṛkarmaṇoḥ kṛti (A 2.3.65) as well, then the agent-genitive and the object-genitive would arise only in kṛṣṇasya kṛtiḥ and jagataḥ kartā kṛṣṇaḥ [where the genitive immediately precedes the kṛt-form], and not in kṛtiḥ kṛṣṇasya and kartā jagataḥ' — for it is elaborated in the Bhāṣya on the sūtra śnān nalopaḥ (A 6.4.23) that, in deference to attested usage (lakṣya), this paribhāṣā does not operate in certain cases of that kind. In reality, however, following the Bhāṣya, both the mention of nirdiṣṭa in this sūtra and the saṁhitā-adhikāra sūtra are simply fruitless — as will be stated under iko yaṇ aci.

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 21 १ अल इति—इदं षष्ठशन्तमेव, अन्त्यस्येति साहचर्यात् । तथाच नियमद्रयमत्र फलितम्—अल एवात्, अन्त्यस्यवाते च । एवं अस्समुदायोत्तरं स्थानपष्ठथस्या लिङ्गमिति बोध्यम् । विस्तरस्तु वृहच्छेखरे द्रष्टव्यः । २ परस्येति—अत्र परस्येत्यावर्तते, तेन परबोधकशब्देन यत्र परस्य स्थाने विधानं तत्रैवेयमुपतिष्ठते, तेन ‘नित्यं ङितः’ इत्यादौ न दोषः ।

translator notes

textual The digital source is corrupt in places: 'धकारल्यलहिते' for expected dhakāra-vyavahite; 'सत्यरि' for sati; 'व्यवधान#ं' with a stray '#'; 'सर्तम्यन्त-' for saptamyanta-; 'अगनाविष्णू इत्यग्नाविष्णू' apparently duplicated/garbled for the avagraha form of agnāviṣṇū; 'निर्धिष्ट' for nirdiṣṭa; 'तेऽ' for 'र्थेऽ' in 'सप्तम्यन्तपदगम्येऽर्ते'. The translation follows the evidently intended readings; none of these is silently emended in the source layer.
translator In 'samidham … makārād ikārasya yaṇ syāt' the unwanted result is that the i (an ik) following the m would take yaṇ conditioned by the a of the ending -am, though that a is separated from it by dh — i.e., the locative condition would operate across an intervening varṇa. The bracketed explanations of the samidham and dadhi udakam examples are the translator's supplements.

SK 41 · A 1.1.67पञ्चमीविभक्तिनिर्णयपरिभाषा

तस्मादित्युत्तरस्य ॥ ४१ ॥

tasmādityuttarasya

[An operation prescribed] with [a designation such as] tasmāt [a fifth-case form] is [understood to apply] to what follows [it immediately].

Rule. When a rule's condition is stated in the ablative — "after X" — the operation applies to the element immediately after X, with no other sound between. Tasmāt imitates the ablative words of sūtras such as dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt (A 6.3.97) and udaḥ sthāstambhoḥ pūrvasya (A 8.4.61); nirdiṣṭa is carried forward from SK 40. The rule is a restriction (niyama): only what follows, and only when nothing intervenes.

Example.

agnim īḻe → the rule tiṅ ṅatiṅaḥ (A 8.1.28) takes away the accent of a verb (a tiṅ-ending word) after a word that is not a verb → the verb īḻe follows agnim → it loses its accent (this loss is called nighāta).

īḻe agnim → the verb comes first → nothing follows the non-verb → the rule does not touch it.

ut·pra·sthānam → udaḥ sthāstambhoḥ pūrvasya (A 8.4.61) prescribes, for sthā and stambh after ud, a substitute savarṇa with the preceding sound → here pra stands between ud and sthā → something intervenes → no change.

dvi + ap → dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt (A 6.3.97) gives ī to ap after dvi, antar or an upasarga → ap follows dvi directly → the rule applies to ap; which sound of ap the ī replaces is settled by SK 44.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

पञ्चमीनिर्देशेन क्रियमाणं कार्यं वर्णान्तरेणाव्यवहितस्य परस्य ज्ञेयम् ॥

An operation effected with a fifth-case (pañcamī) designation is to be understood [as applying] to that which follows without another varṇa intervening.

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 21

—तस्मादिति । उत्तरस्येति किम् । ‘तिङ्कतिङः’ इति निधात उत्तरस्यैव यथा स्यात्, अग्निमीळे । नेह- इळे अग्निम् ॥—अव्यवहितस्येति । एतच्च निर्दिष्टग्रहणानुवृत्त्या लभ्यते । तेन उत्संस्थानं उत्संस्तम्भनमित्यादौ ‘उदस्था’- इति पूर्वसवर्णो न प्रवर्तते ॥ अलोऽन्त्यस्य । स्थानपष्ठीनिर्दिष्टस्य य उच्यते सोऽन्त्यस्यालः स्थाने स्यादित्यर्थः ॥ ‘त्यादीनामः’ सः, यः ॥ स्थानपष्ठीति किम्, आर्धधातुकस्येद् तृच ऋकारात्पूर्वो मा भूत् । इदं च ‘पष्ठी स्थाने’- इत्यनुवृत्त्या लभ्यते । अल इति किम्, ‘पदस्य’ इत्यधिकल्यविधीयमानं ‘वसुसंसु’- इति दत्वं परमानङ्गमित्यादावन्त्यस्य पदस्य मा भूत्

Bālamanoramā

तस्मादित्युत्तरस्य - तस्मादित्युत्तरस्य । द्व्यन्तरुपसर्गेभ्योऽप ईत्उदस्थारतम्भोः पूर्वस्ये॑त्यादिसूत्रगतपञ्चम्यन्तस्यानुकरणंतस्मा॑दिति । 'इति' शब्दानन्तरं 'गम्येऽर्थे' इति शेषः । 'निर्दिष्टे' इत्यनुवर्तते । निरिति नैरन्तर्ये । दिशिरुच्चारणेद्व्यन्त॑रित्यादिसूत्रेषु पञ्चम्यन्तगम्येऽर्थे=द्व्यन्तरादिशब्दे निर्दिष्टे= अव्यवहितोच्चारिते सत्येव ततः परस्यैव ईत्वं भवति, न तु व्यवहितोच्चारिते द्व्यादिशब्दे, नापि ततः पूर्वस्य भवतीति नियमार्थमिदम् । तदाह — पञ्चमीनिर्देशेनेत्यादिना । उत्तरस्य किम् तिङ्ङतिङ॑ इति निघात उत्तरस्यैव भवति — अग्निमीले । नेह ईले अग्निम् । अव्यवहिते किम्, उत्प्रस्थानम् । उदःस्थास्तम्भोरिति पूर्वसवर्णो न भवति ।

tasmād ity uttarasya — tasmād ity uttarasya. [The word] "tasmāt" is an imitation (anukaraṇa) of the fifth-case-ending [expressions] occurring in sūtras such as "dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt" (A 6.3.97) and "udaḥ sthāstambhoḥ pūrvasya" (A 8.4.61). After the word "iti," "in the sense understood [from it]" (gamye 'rthe) is to be supplied. "[When it is] nirdiṣṭa" is carried forward (anuvṛtti) [from "tasminn iti nirdiṣṭe pūrvasya," A 1.1.66]. The nir [in nirdiṣṭa] signifies immediacy (nairantarya); the verb diś [signifies] utterance (uccāraṇa). [So the sense is:] in sūtras such as "dvyantara-," only when the item understood from the fifth-case-ending expression — the word dvi, antar, upasarga, and so on — is nirdiṣṭa, that is, uttered with nothing intervening, does the ī-substitution take place, and then only for what follows it; not when the word dvi etc. is uttered with something intervening, nor for what precedes it. This [sūtra] serves as that restriction (niyama). This is just what he states with "pañcamīnirdeśena" etc. Why "of what follows (uttarasya)"? The nighāta [loss of accent] by "tiṅ ṅatiṅaḥ" (A 8.1.28) occurs only for what follows: agnim īḻe [the verb, standing after a non-tiṅ word, loses its accent]; not so in īḻe agnim. Why "with nothing intervening"? utprasthānam: the pūrvasavarṇa [substitution] by "udaḥ sthāstambhoḥ" (A 8.4.61) does not take place [because pra intervenes between ud and sthā].

translator notes

textual The source runs the two citations together as 'dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt udasthāratambhoḥ pūrvasya', where 'udasthāratambhoḥ' is evidently corrupt for 'udaḥ sthāstambhoḥ' (A 8.4.61); it also prints 'agnimīle / īle' for agnim īḻe / īḻe. The translation follows the evidently intended readings.

SK 42 · A 1.1.52आदेशस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

अलोऽन्त्यस्य ॥ ४२ ॥

alo'ntyasya

[A substitute prescribed] for [what is designated by] a genitive occurs in place of [its] final al [only].

Rule. A substitute prescribed for an item designated by a genitive comes in place of the final al of that item — its last sound only. The words ṣaṣṭhī and sthāne come from SK 38 by anuvṛtti, ṣaṣṭhī now read as "by a genitive", and "designated" and "being prescribed" are understood.

Example.

yad → tyadādīnām aḥ (A 7.2.102), "of tyad and the rest, a" → the genitive designates the whole word yad, but the substitute takes only its last sound, d → ya- → with its ending, yaḥ.

tad → likewise ta-, seen in saḥ (the t becomes s by a later rule).

Applies when / blocked by. Two words of the sūtra are guards. "Substitute": an augment is not a substitute, so the iṬ of A 7.2.35 (SK 36) does not come in place of the final ṛ of the affix tṛC; it is added in front of it. "Of an al": under the heading padasya, "of a pada" (A 8.1.16), the rule vasusraṃsudhvaṃsvanaḍuhāṃ daḥ (A 8.2.72) prescribes d; in paramānaḍudbhyām that d replaces only the last sound of the pada paramānaḍuh, not the entire pada. The exceptions to this rule are SK 44 and SK 45; SK 43 then restores it for one class.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

षष्ठीनिर्दिष्टस्यान्त्यस्याल आदेशः स्यात् ॥

An ādeśa (substitute) occurs in place of the final al of that which is designated by the genitive (ṣaṣṭhī).

Bālamanoramā

अलोऽन्त्यस्य - अलोऽन्त्यस्य ।अ॑लिति प्रत्याहारो वर्णपर्यायः । 'अल' इति षष्ठन्तम् । 'षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा' इत्यतःषष्ठी स्थाने इत्यनुवर्तते । तच्च षष्ठीति प्रथमान्तं तृतीयान्ततया विपरिणम्यते ।निर्दिष्टस्ये॑ति शेषः । 'स्थाने' इत्यनन्तरं 'विधीयमान' इति शेषः । स्थाने विधीयमान आदेशः षष्ठीनिर्दिष्टस्य योऽन्त्योऽल् तस्य स्यादित्यर्थः । तदाह — षष्ठीत्यादिना ।त्यदादीनामः॑-यः सः । आदेश इति किम् , 'आर्धधातुकस्येट्' तृच ऋकारात् पूर्वो मा भूत् । अल इति किम् । पदस्येत्यधिकृत्य विधीयमानं वसुरुआंस्विति दत्वं परमानडुभ्द्यामित्यत्राऽन्त्यस्य कृत्स्नस्य पदस्य मा भूत् ।

alo 'ntyasya — alo 'ntyasya. The pratyāhāra al is a synonym of varṇa ("sound"). alaḥ is genitive-ending. From ṣaṣṭhī sthāneyogā (A 1.1.49) [the words] "ṣaṣṭhī sthāne" are carried forward (anuvṛtti) into this rule. And that [word] ṣaṣṭhī, which [there] ends in the nominative, is transformed so as to end in the instrumental [ṣaṣṭhyā, "by a genitive"]; "[of that which is] designated (nirdiṣṭasya)" is to be supplied. Immediately after "sthāne", "[the substitute] being prescribed (vidhīyamāna)" is to be supplied. The meaning: an ādeśa being prescribed in the place [of something] occurs in place of that final al belonging to what is designated by a genitive. He states this with "of that designated by the genitive…" and so on. [Thus by] tyadādīnām aḥ (A 7.2.102): yaḥ, saḥ [a replaces only the final sound of yad and tad]. Why [say] "ādeśa"? So that [the augment] iṭ of ārdhadhātukasyeṭ (A 7.2.35) not come, in [the suffix] tṛ(c), before the ṛ-sound [an āgama, not being an ādeśa, does not fall under this paribhāṣā]. Why "of al"? So that the [substitution of] d taught by vasusraṃsu… (A 8.2.72), prescribed under the adhikāra padasya (A 8.1.16), not occur in paramānaḍudbhyām in place of the entire final pada [rather than of its final sound alone].

translator notes

textual The source reads vasuruāṃsvi, a digitization corruption of the pratīka of A 8.2.72 (vasusraṃsudhvaṃsvanaḍuhāṃ daḥ); the translation follows the expected reading.

SK 43 · A 1.1.53आदेशस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

ङिच्च ॥ ४३ ॥

ṅicca

And [a substitute] marked with ṅ [replaces] only the final [sound of the sthānin, even though it consists of more than one aL].

Rule. A substitute marked with ṅ (a ṅit) also comes in place of the final al only — even though it consists of more than one sound. It is an apavāda of SK 45. The word antyasya is carried forward from SK 42.

Example.

dadhi before the instrumental singular ending → asthidadhisakthyakṣṇām anaṅ udāttaḥ (A 7.1.75) prescribes the substitute anaṄ for dadhi → anaṄ has more than one sound (a, n; the ṅ is a marker), so SK 45 would have it replace the whole of dadhi → but it is ṅit, so by this rule it replaces only the final i → dadh·an- → the finished instrumental is dadhnā (the a of an is dropped by a later rule).

Other ṅit substitutes: avaṄ and the like; every one of them is anekāl.

Applies when / blocked by. Why this rule at all, when SK 42 already gives final replacement? Because SK 45 would take it away: every ṅit substitute is anekāl. Here Bhaṭṭoji's commentators define the apavāda. A rule undertaken where another rule would necessarily have applied is that other rule's apavāda (yena nāprāpte yo vidhir ārabhyate, "the rule that is begun where that one has not failed to apply"). SK 45 would necessarily apply to anaṄ; SK 43 is undertaken there all the same; so SK 43 is the apavāda and blocks SK 45 among the ṅit substitutes. Why the special rule is the stronger: a rule about particulars seizes them at once, by its own express word, whereas the general rule reaches them only by way of the general, and so is slow; besides, SK 43 would have nothing left to do if SK 45 won, while SK 45 keeps its field in the non-ṅit substitutes of A 3.4.101 and aster bhūḥ. Hence the maxim that the rule of the particular is the stronger.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अयमप्यन्त्यस्यैव स्यात् । सर्वस्य SK 45 इत्यस्यापवादः ॥

This [a ṅit substitute] too replaces only the final [aL]. It is an apavāda of "[an anekāl or śit substitute replaces] the whole" (SK 45).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 21–22

—ङिच्च ॥ अयमपीति । ‘अवङ् स्फोटायनस्य’ गवाग्रम् । ‘अनङ् सौ’ सखा ॥ परस्य यदिति । ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः’ इति न सूत्रितम्, आदेरित्यंशस्य सर्वादेशवाधकलापत्तेः । सिद्धान्ते तु परत्वात्सर्वा- देशत्वं वाधकमित्यनुपदमेव वक्ष्यति ॥—आदेर्वाध्यमिति । आदेरलो वोध्यमित्यर्थः । अल इति ह्यनुवर्तते ॥—अनेकाल्- ‘अस्तेर्भूः’ वभूव ॥ ननु ‘निर्दिश्यमानस्यादेशा भवन्ति’ इत्यनेकालादेशस्य सर्वादेशलं सिध्यति, तत्किमनेनानेकाल्प्रहणेन । नच ‘अलोऽन्त्यस्य’ इत्यन्त्यस्य स्यादिति शङ्क्यम् । ‘ङिच्च’ इत्यस्य नियमार्थत्वाभ्यु- पगमात् । उच्यते-अनेकाल्प्रहणाभावे रामैरित्यादावैसादेशः, ‘आदेः परस्य’ इति मकारस्यैव स्थाने स्यान्न तु सर्वस्य स्थाने इति दिक् । शित उदाहरणम् ‘इदम इश्’ इतः ॥—इत्यादाविति । आदिशब्देन ‘अतो भिस ऐस्’ इत्यादि गृह्यते ॥—परत्वादिति । अत एव ‘आदेः परस्य’ इति पृथक् क्रियत इत्युक्तम् ॥ ननु ‘अनेकाल् शितसर्वस्य’ इत्यतः प्रागेव ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः’ इति पठ्यताम्, किमनेन पृथक् सूत्रकरणेन । न चैवं ‘तस्मिन्निति निर्दिष्टे’- इत्यतो निर्दिष्ट- ग्रहणं नात्रानुवर्ततेति वाच्यम्, तस्यापि सूत्रस्य प्राक् पठने वाधकाभावेन निर्दिष्टग्रहणानुवृत्तिसिद्धेः । मैवम् । ब्राह्मणा अष्टौ इत्यत्र अष्टाभ्यः पूर्वयोरपि जश्शसोरौश् प्रसङ्गात्, यथाश्रुतसूत्राभ्युपगमे तु ‘उत्तरस्य’ इत्यंशः प्रवर्तत एवेति नायं दोषः प्रसज्जत इति ॥ अत्र केचिन्निष्कर्षमाहुः—‘अनेकाल् शित्’- सूत्रात् प्रागेव वर्णलाघवाय ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः’ इति सूत्रिते परत्वात्सर्वादेशेन आदेरित्यंशवदविशेषादुत्तरस्येत्यंशस्यापि वाधितलाद्वाक्यसंस्कारपक्षे ब्राह्मण अस् अष्टन् अस् इति स्थिते ‘अष्टाभ्य औश्’ इत्यस्य दिग्योगे पञ्चमीत्वाद् व्याप्तिन्यायेन अष्टनोऽङ्गात्पूर्वयोरपि जश्शसोरौश् स्यात् । व्याप्तिन्यायस्तु ‘प्राग्रीश्वरान्निपाताः’ इति पठितेऽपि प्रत्यासत्तिन्यायेन ‘अधिरीश्वरे’ इति सूत्रावधिकलसिद्धौ ‘इश्वरे तोष्टुन्कसुनौ’ इति सूत्रावधिकलनिराकरणाय रेफविशिष्टग्रहणं कुर्वता सूत्रकृतैव ज्ञापितः । ततश्च सर्वादेशेन ‘उत्तरस्य’ इत्यस्यावाधनार्थं निर्दिष्टग्रहणानुवृत्त्यर्थं च ‘तस्मिन्निति’- इति सूत्रात्परत्र कृते तु ‘आदेः’ इत्यस्य सर्वादेशवाधकलं स्यात् । तथा च ‘अतो भिस ऐस्’ इत्यादादेश आदेरेव स्यात्, ‘अनेकाल्’- सूत्रस्य ‘अस्तेर्भूः’ इत्यादौ चरितार्थलात् । यथान्यासे तु ‘उत्तरस्य’ इत्यंशः प्रवर्तत एवेत्यष्टाभ्यः परयोरेव जश्शसोरौश् स्यात्, न तु पूर्वयोः । तथा ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः’ इति न सूत्रितमित्यादिमनोरमाग्रन्थस्याप्ययमेवाशय इति ॥ अन्ये तु यथाश्रुतसूत्रनिराकरणपरतयैव मनोरमां योज- यन्ति । तथा—न सूत्रितमित्यस्य ‘अनेकाल्शित्’- सूत्रात्प्राङ् न सूत्रितमिति नार्थः । आदेरित्यंशस्य सर्वादेशवाधकला- पत्तेरित्याद्यग्निमग्नन्यविरोधात्, किंतु तद्वन्थानुकूल्याय ‘स्वं रूपम्’- इति सूत्रात्प्राङ् न सूत्रितमित्यर्थोऽभ्युपेयः । एवं च ‘अनेकाल्’- सूत्रात् प्राक् सूत्रिते तु नास्त्येव दोष इति मनोरमाग्रन्थाशयः । एवं स्थिते निर्दिष्टग्रहणानुवृत्तिलाभाय ‘तस्मि- न्निति निर्दिष्टे’- सूत्रं ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः परस्य’ इत्यस्मात्प्रागेव पठनीयम् । अष्टनोऽङ्गात्पूर्वयोरप्यौश् स्यादित्युक्तादोषस्तु इत्थं परिहरणीयः । ‘तस्मादित्युत्तरस्यादेः परस्य’ इत्यत्र ‘आदेः’ इति पृथग्वाक्यम् । तत्र ‘उत्तरस्य’ इत्यनुवर्तते । सा च स्थानपष्ठी, ‘पष्ठी स्थाने’ इत्यस्य प्राप्तेः । तत्र चायमर्थः-पञ्चमीनिर्देशेन यत्कार्यं तदुत्तरसंवन्धी, उत्तरस्य स्थाने यद्विधीयते तदादेर्भवतीति । इत्थं वाक्यभेदेन व्याख्यानाश्रयणात् ‘अनन्तरस्य’ इति न्यायेन ‘आदेः’ इत्यंश एव सर्वा- देशेन बाध्यते, न तूत्तरस्येत्यंशोऽपि, इति नास्त्येव पूर्वोक्तदोषः । वाक्यभेदेन व्याख्यानं तु ‘उत्तरस्यादेः’ इत्यसमस्तन्या-सकरणेन ज्ञाप्यते । अन्यथा ‘उत्तरादेरिति न सूत्रितम्’ इति वदेत् । किंच ‘अष्टाभ्य औश्’ इत्यस्य दिग्योगे पञ्चमीत्वेन पूर्वपरसाधारणतया अष्टनोऽङ्गाज्जशसोरित्युक्तेऽप्यष्टनोऽङ्गसंज्ञानिमित्तभूतौ यौ जश्शसौ तावेव शीघ्रोपस्थितिकावित्यष्टन-शब्दादुत्तरयोरेव औश् स्यात्, न तु पूर्वयोरिति दिक्

Bālamanoramā

ङिच्च - ङिच्च । ङकार इद्यस्य स-ङित् ।अलोऽन्त्यस्ये॑त्यनुवर्तते । तदाह — अयमपीति । ङिदमपीत्यर्थः । अवङ् तावङ् अनङित्यादिरादेश उदाहरणम् ।नन्वलोऽन्त्यस्येति पूर्वसूत्रेणैव सिद्धे किमर्थमिदमित्यत आह-सर्वस्येति ।अनेकाल् शित् सर्वस्ये॑ति वक्ष्यमाणस्य सर्वादेशत्वविधेरयं विधिरपवादः । अपोद्यते बाध्यते अनेनेति अपवादः । बाहुलकः करणे घञ् । येन नाप्राप्ते यो विधिरारभ्यते स तस्यापवाद इत्यपवादलक्षणम् । अप्राप्ते इति भावे क्तः ।येने॑ति कर्तरि तृतीया । द्वौ नञावावश्यकत्वं बोधयतः । यत्कर्तृकावश्यकप्राप्तौ सत्यां यो विधिरारभ्यते स आरभ्यमाणविधिस्तस्याऽवश्यप्राप्तस्य अपवादो बाधक इति तदर्थः । अयं च न्यायसिद्धः । अवङादयो हि ङित आदेशाः सर्वेऽनेकाल एव । तेषु चानेकाल्विशेषेषु विधीयमानेन ङितामन्त्यादेशत्वेन स्वविषये अवश्यं प्राप्तमनेकाल्सामान्येन विहितं सर्वादेशत्वं बाध्यते, विशेषविहितत्वात्, निरवकाशत्वाच्च । विशेषशास्त्र हि विशेषेषु झटिति प्रवर्तते, विशेषाणां स्वशब्देनोपात्तत्वात् । सामान्यशास्त्रं तु सामान्यमुखेन विशेषेषु प्रवर्तत इति तस्य तेषु मन्दप्रवृत्तिः । अतो विशेषशास्त्रं प्रबलम् । उक्तं च भट्टवार्तिकेअवश्यमेव सामान्यं विशेषं प्रति गच्छति । गतमात्रं च तत्तेन विशेषे स्थाप्यते ध्रुवम्॥॑ इति । किं च यदि ङिच्चेति शास्त्रमनेक#आल्विशेषेषु ङित्सु न प्रवर्तेत, तर्हि तदनर्थकमेव स्यात् ।अनेकाल्शित्सर्वस्ये॑त्यस्य तु ङित्सु अप्रवृत्तावपि नानर्थक्यम्, तस्थस्थमिपां तान्तंताऽमः॑अस्तेर्भू॑रित्यादिष्वनेकाल्षु अङित्सु तस्य सावकाशत्वात् । अतो विशेषशास्त्रं प्रबलमिति ।

ṅic ca — ṅic ca. That of which the letter ṅ is it is ṅit. "[alo] 'ntyasya" is carried forward (anuvṛtti) [from alo 'ntyasya, A 1.1.52] into this rule. He says this with "ayam api" — the meaning is: "a ṅit [substitute] also [replaces only the final aL]." The substitutes avaṄ, tāvaṄ, anaṄ, and the like are the examples. Objection: since [this] is already established by the preceding sūtra "alo 'ntyasya" itself, what is the purpose of this one? Anticipating this he says "sarvasya". This provision is an apavāda of the provision of whole-replacement (sarvādeśatva) to be stated [in] "anekāl śit sarvasya" [A 1.1.55]. An apavāda is that by which [something] is set aside (apodyate), that is, blocked; [the word is formed with] GHaÑ in the sense of the instrument, by the extension [of bahulam] (bāhulaka). The definition of apavāda: "that rule which is undertaken [only] where [another rule] has not failed to apply (yena nāprāpte yo vidhir ārabhyate) is the apavāda of that [rule]." "aprāpte" has [the affix] Kta in the abstract sense (bhāve); "yena" is an instrumental in the sense of the agent (kartari). The two negatives [na + a-prāpte] convey necessity. The purport is this: when the necessary application of some rule as agent stands, the rule which is [nevertheless] undertaken — the rule being introduced — is the apavāda, the blocker, of that necessarily applying [rule]. And this [blocking] is established by reasoning (nyāyasiddha). For the ṅit substitutes — avaṄ and the rest — are all without exception anekāl [consisting of more than one aL]. And when final-replacement (antyādeśatva) is prescribed for ṅit [substitutes], which are particular cases of anekāl, then the whole-replacement enjoined for anekāl in general — though it would necessarily apply in this its own sphere — is blocked among those particulars, both because the special provision [ṅic ca] is prescribed for the particular and because that special provision would itself otherwise be left without scope (niravakāśa). For a śāstra bearing on particulars engages with the particulars at once (jhaṭiti), since the particulars are seized by their own express word; whereas the general śāstra engages with the particulars [only] by way of the general, and hence its engagement with them is sluggish. Therefore the śāstra of the particular is the stronger. And it is said in the Bhaṭṭa-vārttika: "The general inevitably passes over to the particular; and the moment it has reached [the particular's domain], it is assuredly halted there by that [special provision]." Moreover, if the śāstra "ṅic ca" were not to operate in ṅit [substitutes], which are particular cases of anekāl, it would be simply purposeless; whereas "anekāl śit sarvasya", even if it does not operate in ṅit [substitutes], is not purposeless, since it has scope in non-ṅit anekāl [substitutes], such as [those taught in] "tas-thas-tha-mipāṃ tāṃ-taṃ-ta-āmaḥ" [A 3.4.101] and "aster bhūḥ" [A 2.4.52]. Hence [the maxim that] the śāstra of the particular is the stronger.

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 22 १ वहिरङ्गमिति—परस्परापेक्षया व्याप्यनिमित्तकमन्तरङ्गं व्यापकनिमित्तकं च वहिरङ्गमित्युत्सर्गः । विलम्बोपस्थितिकत्वं च वहिरङ्गस्यासिद्धत्वे बीजम् । २ स्यादिति—कार्यशब्दवादे इदम् । ३ स्थानत आन्तर्यादिति—व्यक्तिपक्षे इक्पदेन षट्षष्टेर्भ- हणेन यण्पदेन चतुर्णां ग्रहणेन यथासंस्थेनानिर्वाहात्स्थानकृतान्तर्येणैव निर्वाहः । जातिपक्षे तु यथासंस्थेनापि निर्वाहो यद्यपि संभवति तथापि गुणवृद्धिविध्यर्थमावश्यकं स्थानकृतान्तर्यमिहापि न्याय्यत्वादुपन्यस्तमिति भावः ।

translator notes

textual The source reads "avaṅ tāvaṅ anaṅ ityādir ādeśa udāharaṇam". avaṄ (A 6.1.123) and anaṄ (A 7.1.93) are familiar ṅit substitutes, but "tāvaṄ" is unattested and may be a digitization error for tātaṄ (A 7.1.35); the transmitted reading is kept in the translation. The source also shows a stray character in "anek#āl-viśeṣeṣu" (read anekāl-viśeṣeṣu) and a garbled citation of A 3.4.101, rendered here in its standard form.

SK 44 · A 1.1.54आदेशस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

आदेः परस्य ॥ ४४ ॥

ādeḥ parasya

[An operation prescribed] in place of what follows (para) [takes effect] on its initial [al].

Rule. When an operation belongs to a following element — fixed as such by an ablative condition, SK 41 — it takes effect on the initial al of that element, not on its final. Bhaṭṭoji calls this an apavāda of SK 42. The word alaḥ is carried forward too, so the operation still hits one sound, not the whole element.

Example.

dvi + ap → dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt (A 6.3.97): after dvi, antar or an upasarga, ī for ap → ap is the following element (SK 41) → SK 42 would have ī replace the final p; this rule sends it to the initial a → dvi + īp- → the i and the ī, being savarṇa (SK 10), become one long ī by a later sandhi rule, akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ (A 6.1.101) → dvīpam.

Without alaḥ, the ī would replace the whole of ap.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

परस्य यद्विहितं तत्तस्यादेर्बोध्यम् । अलोऽन्त्यस्य SK 42 इत्यस्यापवादः ॥

What is prescribed for a following [element] is to be understood [as taking effect] on the initial [al] of it. It is an apavāda of *alo 'ntyasya* (SK 42).

Bālamanoramā

आदेः परस्य - आदेः परस्य । परस्येति ।द्व्यन्तरुपसर्गेभ्योऽप ई॑दित्यादौतस्मादित्युत्तरस्ये॑ति परिभाषायां परस्य नियमितं कार्यं यत् तत्तस्यादेरेव भवति, नत्वलोऽन्त्यस्येति तदन्तस्येत्यर्थः । तदाह — अलोन्त्यस्येत्यस्यापवाद इति । तत्र 'अल' इत्यप्यनुवर्तनीयम् । तेनद्वीप॑मित्यत्र ईत्वं पान्तसमुदायस्य न भवति ।

ādeḥ parasya — ādeḥ parasya. *parasya* — In [rules] such as *dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt* (A 6.3.97), the operation which is determined as belonging to the para [the following element] by the paribhāṣā *tasmād ity uttarasya* (A 1.1.67) — that takes effect only on the initial [al] of that [element], and not, as per *alo 'ntyasya* [A 1.1.52], on its final — such is the meaning. He states this — "it is the apavāda of *alo 'ntyasya*." In this [sūtra] the word *alaḥ* too must be supplied by anuvṛtti [from *alo 'ntyasya*]. By that, in *dvīpam* the ī-substitution does not take effect on the whole aggregate ending in *p* [the entire *ap*; it applies only to its initial *a*].

SK 45 · A 1.1.55आदेशस्थाननिर्णयपरिभाषा

अनेकाल्शित्सर्वस्य ॥ ४५ ॥

anekālśitsarvasya

A substitute that is anekāl [consists of more than one al] or is śit [has ś as it-marker] replaces the whole [of the original].

Rule. A substitute that is anekāl — consisting of more than one al — or śit, marked with ś, comes in place of the whole sthānin. Bhaṭṭoji calls the sūtra clear, since no further word needs to be carried into it, and an apavāda of SK 42.

Example.

as (the root) → aster bhūḥ (A 2.4.52), "of as, bhū" → bhū has more than one sound, so it is anekāl → SK 42 would let it replace only the s; by this rule it replaces the whole root → bhū.

Other cases named by Bhaṭṭoji's commentators: the endings taught by tas-thas-tha-mipāṃ tāṃ-taṃ-ta-āmaḥ (A 3.4.101), and idama iś (A 5.3.3).

Applies when / blocked by. One might object that "for as comes bhū" would obviously mean the whole root; but SK 42 would cut the substitute down to the final sound, so this exception is needed. This rule also beats SK 44 when both apply. At the stage aṣṭā + as — the word aṣṭan has taken ā by aṣṭana ā vibhaktau (A 7.2.84), and the ending jas or śas follows — the rule aṣṭābhya auś (A 7.1.21) prescribes auś in place of that ending. auś is prescribed for the following element, so SK 44 offers it to the initial a of as; but auś, which Bhaṭṭoji's commentators count as anekāl, is also offered to the whole ending. Which rule yields? Each has its own field — SK 44 in dvīpam, SK 45 in aster bhūḥ and idama iś — so they are of equal strength, and between rules of equal strength the later one prevails: vipratiṣedhe paraṃ kāryam (A 1.4.2), the para principle of SK 46. A 1.1.55 is later than A 1.1.54, so the whole ending as is replaced. The same holds in ato bhisa ais (A 7.1.9).

Watch out. Bhaṭṭoji's alo 'ntya- is a quotation of part of the sūtra alo 'ntyasya, not a word of ordinary Sanskrit; his commentators defend the shortening as a quotation, on the model of prāg rīśvarān nipātāḥ (SK 19), which quotes part of adhir īśvare (A 1.4.97).

Siddhānta-kaumudī

स्पष्टम् । अलोऽन्त्यसूत्रापवादः । अष्टाभ्य औश् SK 372 इत्यादौ आदेः परस्य इत्येतदपि परत्वादनेन बाध्यते ॥

[The sūtra is] clear. It is an apavāda of the sūtra *alo 'ntyasya*. In *aṣṭābhya auś* (SK 372) and the like, even [the paribhāṣā] *ādeḥ parasya* is overridden by this [rule], because of [its] para-hood [being the later rule].

Bālamanoramā

अनेकाल्शित्सर्वस्य - अनेकाल्शित्सर्वस्य । न एकोऽनेकः, अनेकोऽल् यस्य सोऽनेकाल्, शकार इत् यस्य स शित्, अनेकाल्व शिच्चेति समाहारद्वन्द्वः । स्पष्टमिति । अनुवर्तनीयपदान्तराऽभावादिति भावः । अस्तेर्भूरित्याद्युदाहरणम् । नन्वस्धातोर्भूर्भवतीत्युक्ते कृत्स्नस्यैवादेशः प्राप्त इति किमर्थमिदं सूत्रमारभ्यत इत्यत आह-अलोऽन्त्यसूत्रापवाद इति ।अलोन्त्येति॑ति सूत्रैकदेशानुकरणम् । अनुकरणत्वादेव नापशब्दः, अधिरीश्वर इति सूत्रैकदेशस्य प्राग्रीश्वरान्निपाता इति ग्रहणाल्लिङ्गात् । स्यादेतत् । अष्टन्शब्दाज्जसि शसि चअष्टन आ विभक्ता॑विति आत्वे अष्टा अस् इति स्थिते अष्टाभ्य औशिति कृताकारादष्टनः परयोर्जश्शसोर्विधीयमान औशादेशोऽलोऽन्त्यस्येति बाधित्वा आदेः परस्येत्यादेरकारस्य प्राप्तः । अनेकाल्त्वाच्च सर्वादेशः प्राप्तः । एवम्अतो भिस ऐ॑सित्यादावपि । तत्र कतरच्छास्त्रं बाध्यं कतरच्च प्रवर्तत इत्यत्र किं विनिगमकम्रित्यत आह-अष्टाभ्य औशित्यादाविति । आदिनाअतो भिस ऐ॑सित्यादिसंग्रहः । अष्टाभ्य औ॑ शित्यादावादेः परस्येत्येतदपि परत्वादनेन बाध्यत इत्यन्वयः । अस्तेर्भूरित्यादौ अनेकाल्शिदित्यनेन यथाऽलोऽन्त्यस्येति बाध्यते तथ#आऽष्टाभ्या औशित्यादावादेः परस्येत्येतदपि बाध्यत इत्यर्थः । नन्वस्तेर्भूरित्यादावलोऽन्त्यस्येति प्राप्ते सत्येवानेकाल्शित्सर्वस्येति नापवादः । अस्तेर्भूरित्यादावादेः परस्येत्यप्राप्तावपि तत्प्रवृत्तेरित्यत आह-परत्वादिति ।विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्य॑मिति तुल्यबलविरोधे परप्राबल्यस्य वक्ष्यमाणत्वादिति भावः ।आदेः परस्ये॑त्यस्यावकाशोद्व्यन्तरुपसर्गेभ्योऽप ई॑दित्यादिः ।अनेकाल्शित्सर्वस्ये॑त्यस्यावकाशः-॒अस्तेर्भूः॒॑इदम इ॑शित्यादिः । अतस्तुल्यबलत्वमुभयोः ।

anekālśit sarvasya — anekālśit sarvasya. "Not one" is aneka; that of which the als are aneka [more than one] is *anekāl*; that of which the letter *ś* is an it is *śit*; "anekāl and śit" — a samāhāra-dvandva. *spaṣṭam iti* — [He calls it "clear"] because there is no further word requiring anuvṛtti — such is the import. *aster bhūḥ* (A 2.4.52) and the like are the examples. Objection: when it is said "for [the root] *as* there comes *bhū*," the substitute is obtained for the whole [root] as it stands; to what purpose, then, is this sūtra begun? To this he says — "it is an apavāda of the *alo 'ntya-* sūtra." ["alo 'ntya" —] this is an imitation (anukaraṇa) of a part of the sūtra [*alo 'ntyasya*]. Precisely because it is an anukaraṇa it is not a solecism (apaśabda) — on the strength of the indicatory sign (liṅga) that a part of the sūtra *adhir īśvare* (A 1.4.97) is taken up [as *rīśvara*] in *prāg rīśvarān nipātāḥ* (A 1.4.56). *syād etat* — Suppose this: after the word *aṣṭan*, when *jas* or *śas* follows, with the ā-substitution by *aṣṭana ā vibhaktau* (A 7.2.84) the stage *aṣṭā as* is reached; there the substitute *auś*, prescribed by *aṣṭābhya auś* (A 7.1.21) in place of *jas* and *śas* after the *aṣṭan* whose ā has been effected, presents itself — setting aside *alo 'ntyasya* — for the initial *a* [of *as*], by *ādeḥ parasya*; and, [the substitute] being anekāl, it presents itself for the whole [ending] as well. So too in *ato bhisa ais* (A 7.1.9) and the like. There, which śāstra is to be overridden and which operates — what is the deciding consideration (vinigamaka)? To this he says — *aṣṭābhya auś ityādau*. By *ādi* [in ityādau], *ato bhisa ais* and the like are included. The construal: in *aṣṭābhya auś* and the like, even *ādeḥ parasya* is overridden by this [rule], because of para-hood. The meaning: just as in *aster bhūḥ* and the like *alo 'ntyasya* is set aside by *anekālśit* [sarvasya], so in *aṣṭābhya auś* and the like *ādeḥ parasya* too is set aside. Objection: [this rule counts as an apavāda only] where *alo 'ntyasya* has actually presented itself, as in *aster bhūḥ* and the like; but *anekālśit sarvasya* is no apavāda [of *ādeḥ parasya*], since in *aster bhūḥ* and the like it operates even without *ādeḥ parasya* being applicable. To this he says — *paratvāt*. The import: because it will be stated [later] that, when rules of equal strength conflict, the later (para) prevails — *vipratiṣedhe paraṃ kāryam* (A 1.4.2). The [independent] scope of *ādeḥ parasya* is *dvyantarupasargebhyo 'pa īt* (A 6.3.97) and the like; the scope of *anekālśit sarvasya* is *aster bhūḥ*, *idama iś* (A 5.3.3), and the like. Hence the two are of equal strength.

translator notes

textual The digital source reads "anekālva śicceti", evidently for "anekāl ca śic ceti" (the samāhāra-dvandva), and "kiṃ vinigamakamr-" with a stray akṣara, evidently for "vinigamakam". The corrupt transmitted readings are preserved in the source; the translation follows the evident readings.

SK 46 · A 1.3.11अधिकारनिर्णयपरिभाषा

स्वरितेनाधिकारः ॥ ४६ ॥

svaritenādhikāraḥ

By the svarita [accent], an adhikāra [a governing element that recurs in subsequent rules] is [signaled].

Rule. A word that Pāṇini pronounced with the svarita accent (SK 7) is adhikṛta, "put in charge": it is an adhikāra, and it recurs by anuvṛtti in the sūtras that follow. Adhikāra means employment — as a man "appointed over the village" is employed there, so a word's employment is its continuing into later rules. The svarita is not marked in the written text; like the nasality of marker vowels (SK 3), it is known from the author's declaration (pratijñā). How far the anuvṛtti runs is known only from the received interpretation (vyākhyāna).

Example.

sthāne in SK 38 → pronounced with the svarita → it recurs in SK 39, where it yields the second sentence "most similar by place" → cetā, with e and not a.

anta inside ādyantau (SK 36) → the svarita rests on that half alone → only anta recurs in SK 37: the mit is a final part → vārīṇi.

pūrvatrāsiddham (SK 12) → an adhikāra met in chapter 1 → read into every rule of the Tripādī (the last three quarters of the Aṣṭādhyāyī, A 8.2–8.4).

Applies when / blocked by. One might say that interpretation alone would tell us where a word recurs, just as it tells us where it stops; Bhaṭṭoji's commentators answer that the Mahābhāṣya shows the sūtra's uses at many points.

Watch out — the ranking of rules. Bhaṭṭoji appends three paribhāṣās to this sūtra.

The first: "Among para, nitya, antaraṅga and apavāda, each later one is stronger than the earlier." The four names are these.

para: the later of two rules in the Aṣṭādhyāyī. When two rules of equal strength clash (vipratiṣedha), the later is applied: vipratiṣedhe paraṃ kāryam (A 1.4.2). SK 45 beating SK 44 was a case.
nitya: a rule that would apply whether or not the other operation has been done (kṛtākṛtaprasaṅgī yo vidhiḥ sa nityaḥ). It beats a para rule.
antaraṅga: a rule that depends on less (alpāpekṣam antaraṅgam); its opposite, a rule that depends on more, is bahiraṅga. It beats a para and a nitya rule.
apavāda: the special rule, defined at SK 43. It beats all three.

Nitya over para:

tud + ti → two rules present themselves: the guṇa of a light penult (the u of tud is a light vowel in the penult, SK 31), which is the later rule, and the affix śa (tudādibhyaḥ śaḥ, A 3.1.77) → śa applies whether or not the guṇa has been done, while the guṇa, once śa is in, no longer applies → śa is nitya, so śa goes in first → tud·a·ti → śa is treated as ṅit (sārvadhātukam apit, A 1.2.4), and before a ṅit affix guṇa is forbidden (kṅiti ca, A 1.1.5) → tudati, with no guṇa.

The reason a nitya rule is strong: the nitya rule never fails to apply, so if one of the two must be imagined not to act, it should be the rule that fails anyway.

Antaraṅga over para:

ubhaya + the plural ending → sarvādīni sarvanāmāni (A 1.1.27) gives ubhaya the name sarvanāma → the later rule prathamacaramatayālpārdhakatipayanemāś ca (A 1.1.33) would make that name optional → but the name by A 1.1.27 depends on no case ending, so it is antaraṅga → it holds invariably, setting the later rule aside → ubhaye devamanuṣyāḥ.

The reason an antaraṅga rule is strong is a further paribhāṣā, from the Mahābhāṣya on vāha ūṭh (A 6.4.132): asiddhaṃ bahiraṅgam antaraṅge — when an antaraṅga rule has presented itself, the bahiraṅga rule is treated as not existing.

Apavāda over para:

dadhi + the instrumental ending → anaṄ (A 7.1.75) → SK 45, the later rule, would replace the whole of dadhi; SK 43 replaces the final i only → SK 43 is the apavāda, by the maxim yena nāprāpte → dadhnā.

The reason an apavāda is strong was given at SK 43.

Antaraṅga over nitya:

grāmaṇī used as a neuter, before the locative singular ending → the augment nUM by iko 'ci vibhaktau (A 7.1.73) is nitya; the shortening by hrasvo napuṃsake (A 1.2.47, SK 35) is antaraṅga → the shortening goes first → grāmaṇi → then nUM → grāmaṇini kule. Had nUM gone first, the stem would have ended in n, not in a vowel, and no shortening could have followed.

Apavāda over antaraṅga:

daitya + ariḥ → a before a vowel: ād guṇaḥ (A 6.1.87), being antaraṅga, presents itself even against the later akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ (A 6.1.101) → but the lengthening of savarṇa vowels is its apavāda → daityāriḥ.

śrī + īśaḥ → iko yaṇ aci (A 6.1.77), being antaraṅga, presents itself likewise → the savarṇa lengthening is its apavāda → śrīśaḥ.

The second appended paribhāṣā is the one just quoted, asiddhaṃ bahiraṅgam antaraṅge. The third is akṛtavyūhāḥ pāṇinīyāḥ, "Pāṇini's followers do not set out the arrangement in advance". Taken literally — vyūha being the separating of base and affix — it would make the whole grammar pointless, so Bhaṭṭoji supplies a qualification: seeing that a condition (nimitta) of an operation is about to perish, they do not carry out the operation that condition would occasion. The illustration is the form seduṣaḥ, to be explained when the word sedivas is examined later. Scholars discuss whether this paribhāṣā has any basis.

This ends the paribhāṣā-prakaraṇa.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

स्वरितत्वयुक्तं शब्दस्वरुपमधिकृतं बोध्यम् ॥ [(परिभाषा - ) परनित्यान्तरङ्गापवादानामुत्तरोत्तरं बलीयः] ॥ [(परिभाषा - ) असिद्धं बहिरङ्गमन्तरङ्गे] ॥ [(परिभाषा - ) अकृतव्यूहाः पाणिनीयाः] ॥ निमित्तं विनाशोन्मुखं दृष्ट्वा तत्प्रयुक्तं कार्यं न कुर्वन्तीत्यर्थः ॥

A word-form accompanied by svarita [accentuation] should be understood as adhikṛta [made a governing heading, i.e., carried through the following rules]. (paribhāṣā) "Among para [later], nitya, antaraṅga, and apavāda [rules], each succeeding one is stronger [than the preceding]." (paribhāṣā) "A bahiraṅga [operation] is asiddha [regarded as not having taken effect] with respect to an antaraṅga [operation]." (paribhāṣā) "The Pāṇinīyas do not construct [derivational] arrangements in advance (akṛtavyūhāḥ pāṇinīyāḥ)." The meaning is: seeing that a conditioning ground (nimitta) is on the verge of perishing, they do not carry out the operation occasioned by it.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 22

—स्वरितेनाधिकारः । अत्रेत्यंभूतलक्षणे तृतीया । अधि-कारो विनियोगः । कियद्दूरमधिकार इत्यत्र तु व्याख्यानमेव शरणम् । यथा—आ सप्तमाध्यायपरिसमाप्तेरङ्गाधिकारः, न तु प्रागभ्यासविकारेभ्य एवेत्यादि । यद्वा स्वरित इति सप्तम्यन्तम्, स्वरिते दृष्टे अधिकारो निवर्तत इत्यर्थः । कः स्वरितोऽधि-कारार्थः, कश्च तन्निवृत्त्यर्थं इत्यत्र तु व्याख्यानमेव शरणम् ॥ नन्वेवं व्याख्यानादेवानुवृत्त्यननुवृत्ती स्तः किमनेन सूत्रेणेति चेदन्नाहुः—अर्थान्तरसंग्रहायेदं सूत्रं कृतम् । तथाहि । अधि अधिकः कारोऽधिकारः, अधिकं कार्यं गौणेऽपि शास्त्रप्रवृत्ति-रित्यर्थः । तथा च गौणमुख्यन्यायो यत्र नेष्यते अपादानाधिकरणादौ, तत्र स्वरितः पाठ्यः ॥ किंच अधिकः कारः कृति-रियं यत्पूर्वः सन् परं बाधते । तथा च ‘नुमचिरतृज्वद्भावेभ्यो नुद्—’ इत्यादि वक्ष्यमाणपूर्वविप्रतिषेधाः सर्वे संगृहीता भ-वन्ति । तत्र स्वरितपाठेनैव गतार्थलादिति ॥—परनित्येति । परात् नित्यं यथा—‘दुदादिभ्यः शः’ तुदति । ‘रुधादिभ्यः श्रम्’ रुणद्धि, परमपि लघूपधगुणं वाधित्वा नित्यत्वात् शश्रमौ ॥ तथा धिनवाव, धिनवाम । परमपि ‘लोपश्चास्यान्यतरस्यां म्बोः’ इत्युकारलोपं वाधित्वा नित्यत्वात् ‘आडुत्तमस्य—’ इत्याद् । परादन्तरङ्गं यथा—उभये देवमनुष्याः । इह ‘प्रथमच-रम—’ इति परमपि विकल्पं वाधित्वा ‘सर्वादीनि—’ इति सर्वनामसंज्ञा, विभक्तिनिरपेक्षत्वेनान्तरङ्गत्वात् । तथा—स्रवतेः ‘णिश्रि—’ इति चङि द्वित्वे उपधागुणादन्तरङ्गत्वादुवङ्, असुस्रुवत् । परादपवादो यथा—परमपि ‘अनेकाल्—’ इति सर्वा-देशं वाधित्वा ‘डिच्च’ इत्यन्तादेशः । दध्ना, दध्ने । ‘अस्थिदधि—’ इत्यनङ् । नित्यादन्तरङ्गं यथा—प्रामणिनी कुले । नित्य-मपि ‘इकोऽचि—’ इति नुमं वाधित्वा ‘हस्वो नपुंसके—’ इति हस्वः । कृते तु नुमि अनजन्तत्वाद्भस्वो न स्यात् । अन्तरङ्गा-दपवादो यथा—दैत्यारिः, श्रीशः । परमपि सवर्णदीर्घं वाधित्वा अन्तरङ्गत्वादाहुणे यणि च प्राप्तेऽपवादत्वात्सवर्णदीर्घः । तथा उच्यौ उच्यः, सुत्वौ सुत्वः इत्यत्रान्तरङ्गत्वादियङि उवङि च प्राप्तेऽपवादत्वात् ‘एरनेकाचः—’ इति, ‘ओः सुपि’ इति च यण् । यथपवादोऽन्यत्र चरितार्थस्तर्हि परान्तरङ्गाभ्यां बाधत एव । तथाहि—‘डिच्च’ इत्येतदनन्यार्थङकारयुक्तेष्वनङादिषु चरितार्थलात्तातङि न प्रवर्तते, किंतु परेण ‘अनेकाल्शित्—’ इत्यनेन बाध्यते । जीवतात् भवतात्, अयजे इन्द्रम्, प्रामे इह, सर्वे इत्यम् । अत्र अयजइ इन्द्रम्, प्रामइ इह, सर्वइ इत्यमिति स्थिते अन्तरङ्गेण गुणेन सवर्णदीर्घो बाध्यते । तस्य समानाश्रये दैत्यारिः श्रीश इत्यादौ चरितार्थलात् ॥—असिद्धमिति । तेन पचावेदमित्यादौ ‘एत ऐ’ इत्येत्वं न ॥—अकृतव्यूहा इति । अकृतकार्या इत्यर्थः । एवं तर्हि सर्वस्य शास्त्रस्य वैयर्थ्यं स्यादत आह—निमित्तं वि-नाशोन्मुखं दृष्ट्वेति । लोकसिद्धार्थकथनमेतत् । यद्वा अक्षरार्थेनाप्येतत्कथनम् । ऊह्यते तर्क्यत इत्यूहः कार्यम्, विशिष्टो य ऊहो विनाशोन्मुखनिमित्तकं कार्यम्, अकृतो व्यूहो यैस्ते अकृतव्यूहा इति । यथपि ‘कृतमपि शास्त्रं निवर्तयन्ति’ इति परिभाषान्तरं पठ्यते फलं च तुल्यं, तथापि अकृतव्यूहा इत्येव लघुं, ‘प्रक्षालनाद्धि पङ्कस्य दूरादस्पर्शनं वरम्’ इति न्याया-दिति भावः ॥—न कुर्वन्तीति । यथा ‘निषेदुषीम्’ इत्यादौ क्वसोरिटमन्तरङ्गत्वात्प्राप्तमपि भाविना संप्रसारणेन वलादित्वं नह्वयतीत्यालोच्य न कुर्वन्तीत्यर्थः ॥ ॥ इति तत्त्वबोधिन्यां परिभाषाप्रकरणम् ॥ अथाच्सधिः

Bālamanoramā

स्वरितेनाधिकारः - स्वरितेनाधिकारः । अधिकारः=व्यापृतिः । यथा लोकेअधिकृतो ग्रामेऽसा॑विति व्यापृत इति गम्यते । शब्दस्य च उत्तरसूत्रेष्वनुवृत्तिरेव व्यापृतिः । स्वरितेन=स्वरविशेषेण अधिकार उत्तरत्रानुवृत्तिरूपव्यापारः प्रत्येतव्यः । यत् पदं शास्त्रकृता स्वरिताख्यस्वरविशेषविशिष्टमुच्चारितं तदुत्तरसूत्रेष्वनुवर्तनीयमिति यावत् । फलितमाह — स्वरितत्वयुक्तमित्यादिना । आनुनासिक्यवत्सव्रितोच्चारणमपि प्रतिज्ञागम्यम् । अनुवृत्तावुत्तरावधिस्तु व्याख्यानादेवावगन्तव्यः । यद्यपि निवृत्तिवदनुवृत्तिरपि व्याख्यानादेव भविष्यतीति किं सूत्रेण, तथापि भाष्ये एतत्प्रयोजनं बहुधा प्रपञ्चितम् ।परनित्येति । परादीनां मध्ये पूर्वपूर्वापेक्षया उत्तरमुत्तरं शास्त्रं बलवत्तपरमित्यर्थः ।उत्तरोत्तर॑मित्यत्रआनुपूर्व्ये द्वे वाच्ये॑ इति द्वित्वम् ।कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु॑ इति कर्मधारयवद्भावात्सुपो लुक् । बलवच्छब्दात्द्विवचनविभज्योपपदे तरबीयसुनौ ॑ इति ईयसुन् ।विन्मतोर्लु॑गिति मतुपो लुक् । परापेक्षया नित्यान्तरङ्गापवादाः, नित्यापेक्षयाऽपि अन्तरङ्गापवादौ, अन्तरङ्गापेक्षयापि अपवाद इत्येवं क्रमेण पूर्वपूर्वापेक्षया उत्तरोत्तरबलवत्त्वमिति फलितोऽर्थः । परं विप्रतिषेधसूत्रात् बलवत् । परान्नित्यं यथा — तुदति । अत्र 'तुदादिभ्यः शः' इति शप्रत्ययं बाधित्वा परत्वाल्लधूपधगुणः प्राप्तः, स च शप्रत्यये प्रवृत्ते सति न प्रवृत्तिमर्हति । शप्रत्ययस्तु कृतेऽकृतेऽपि लघूपधगुणे प्रवृत्तिमर्हतीति स नित्यः ।कृताकृतप्रसङ्गी यो विधिः स नित्य॑ इति हि तल्लक्षणम् । अतो नित्यः शप्रत्ययो लघूपधगुणं बाधित्वा प्रथमं प्रवर्तते । ततः 'सार्वधातुकमपित्' इति शस्य ङित्त्वात् 'क्ङिति च ' इति निषेधान्न गुणः । अकॢप्ताऽभावकस्य नित्यशास्त्रस्याऽभावकल्पनापेक्षया कॢप्ताऽभावकस्याऽनित्यशास्त्रस्यैव तत्कल्पनं युज्यत इति नित्यस्य बलवत्त्वे बीजम् । परादन्तरङ्गं यथा — उभये देवमनुष्याः । अत्रप्रथमचरमे॑ति परमपि विकल्पं बाधित्वासर्वादीनी॑ति नित्यैव सर्वनामसंज्ञा भवति, तस्या विभक्तिनिरपेक्षत्वेनारङ्गत्वात् । अल्पापेक्षमन्तरङ्गमिति हि तल्लक्षणम् । तस्य बलवत्त्वे बीजमाह — असिद्धं बहिरङ्गमन्तरङ्गे । अन्तरङ्गशास्त्रे प्रसक्ते बहिरङ्गशास्त्रमविद्यमानं प्रत्येतव्यमित्यर्थः । इयं तु परिभाषावाहौउठ्सूत्रे भाष्ये स्थिता । परादपवादो यथा — दध्ना । अस्थिदधीत्यनङ् । इह परमप्यनेकालिति सर्वादेशं बाधित्वाङिच्चे॑त्यन्तादेशः, तस्य येन नाप्राप्तिन्यायेन तदपवादत्वात् । अपवादस्य बलवत्त्वे बीजं । त्वनुपदमेवोक्तम् । नित्यादन्तरङ्गं यथा — ग्रामणिनि कुले इह । नित्यमपीकोऽचीति नुमं बाधित्वा 'ह्रस्वो नपुंसके' इति ह्रस्वः । प्रथमतः कृते नुम्यनजन्तत्वाध्यस्वो न स्यात् । अन्तरङ्गादपवादो यथा — दैत्यारिः । श्रीशः । परमपि सवर्णदीर्घं बाधित्वाऽन्तरङ्गत्वादाद्गुणे यणि च प्राप्तेऽपवादत्वात्सवर्णदीर्घः ।अकृतव्यूहाः पाणिनीयाः । न कृतः अकृतः, व्यूह=प्रकृतिप्रत्ययविवेचनं यैस्तेऽकृतव्यूहाः पाणिनीयाः=पाणिनिशिष्या इत्यक्षरार्थः । तर्हि सर्वस्य शास्त्रस्य वैयथ्र्यमित्यतोऽध्याह्मत्य व्याचष्टे-निमित्तमित्यादिना । 'सेदुष' इत्याद्युदाहरणम् । तच्च शब्दाधिकारेसेदिवस्शब्दनिरूपणावसरे मूल एव स्पष्टीभविष्यति । इयं परिभाषा निर्मूला निष्फला चेति परिभाषेन्दुशेखरे स्पष्टम् । इति श्रीवासुदेवदीक्षितविरचितायां सिद्धान्तकौमुदीव्याख्यायां बालमनोरमायां परिभाषाप्रकरणम्॥*********************अथ प्राग्दिशीयाः । — — — — — —

svaritenādhikāraḥ — Adhikāra means employment (vyāpṛti). Just as in ordinary usage, [on hearing] "he is appointed (adhikṛta) over the village," it is understood that he is employed [there]; and for a word, employment is precisely its recurrence (anuvṛtti) in the subsequent sūtras. By the svarita — that is, by a particular accent — the adhikāra, the function consisting in recurrence in what follows, is to be recognized. That is to say: whatever word the author of the śāstra has pronounced marked with the particular accent called svarita is to be carried forward into the subsequent sūtras. He states the upshot with svaritatvayuktam, and so on. Like nasality [in the case of it vowels], the svarita pronunciation too is knowable [only] from the [author's] avowal (pratijñā). But the further limit of an anuvṛtti is to be ascertained only from the received interpretation (vyākhyāna). Although [one might urge]: like cessation [of a word], its recurrence too will come about from interpretation alone, so what need of the sūtra? — nevertheless the purposes of this [sūtra] are elaborated at many points in the Bhāṣya.

As for paranitya-: among para and the rest, each later śāstra [rule] is stronger (balavattara) than each earlier one relative to it — this is the meaning. In uttarottaram, the doubling is by [the vārttika] ānupūrvye dve vācye ["in the sense of succession, the word is to be stated twice"]; because of treatment as a karmadhāraya by [the vārttika] karmadhārayavad uttareṣu, the case ending is elided (luk). [As for balīyaḥ:] from the word balavat, [the comparative suffix] īyasun [is added] by dvivacanavibhajyopapade tarabīyasunau (A 5.3.57), and matup is elided by vinmator luk (A 5.3.65). The resulting sense: relative to the para, the nitya, antaraṅga, and apavāda [are stronger]; relative to the nitya as well, the antaraṅga and apavāda; relative even to the antaraṅga, the apavāda — thus, in order, each later one is stronger than each earlier.

That the para [rule] is strong [follows] from the vipratiṣedha sūtra [vipratiṣedhe paraṃ kāryam, A 1.4.2]. The nitya [prevailing] over the para, as in tudati: here the guṇa of the light penult (laghūpadhaguṇa), being para, presented itself so as to override the affix śa [taught] by tudādibhyaḥ śaḥ (A 3.1.77); but once the affix śa has come into operation, that [guṇa] no longer deserves to operate, whereas the affix śa deserves to operate whether or not the light-penult guṇa has been carried out — hence it is nitya. For its definition is: "a rule that has occasion [to apply] whether [the other operation] has or has not been done is nitya (kṛtākṛtaprasaṅgī yo vidhiḥ sa nityaḥ)." Therefore the nitya affix śa operates first, overriding the light-penult guṇa; and then, since śa is [treated as] ṅit by sārvadhātukam apit (A 1.2.4), guṇa does not [take place], because of the prohibition kṅiti ca (A 1.1.5). The seed of the nitya's strength: compared with imagining non-operation for the nitya rule, whose failure is nowhere established [since it would apply in either event], it is fitting to impute that [non-operation] only to the non-nitya rule, whose failure is [already] established.

The antaraṅga [prevailing] over the para, as in ubhaye devamanuṣyāḥ: here, overriding even the later [rule] prathamacarama- [prathamacaramatayālpārdhakatipayanemāś ca, A 1.1.33], which [would make it] optional, the sarvanāma designation by sarvādīni [sarvanāmāni] (A 1.1.27) takes effect invariably (nitya), since that [designation], being independent of any case ending, is antaraṅga. For its definition is: "the antaraṅga is that which depends on less (alpāpekṣam antaraṅgam)." The seed of its strength he states [with the paribhāṣā] asiddhaṃ bahiraṅgam antaraṅge: when an antaraṅga rule has presented itself, the bahiraṅga rule is to be regarded as non-existent — this is the meaning. This paribhāṣā stands in the Bhāṣya on the sūtra vāha ūṭh (A 6.4.132).

The apavāda [prevailing] over the para, as in dadhnā: [there is] the [substitute] anaṅ by asthidadhi- [asthidadhisakthyakṣṇām anaṅ udāttaḥ, A 7.1.75]; here, overriding even the later [rule] anekāl- [anekālśit sarvasya, A 1.1.55, prescribing] substitution for the whole, substitution for the final [sound alone takes place] by ṅic ca (A 1.1.53), since by the maxim yena nāprāpti [a rule undertaken where another would inevitably have obtained overrides that other] it is its apavāda. But the seed of the apavāda's strength has been stated just above.

The antaraṅga [prevailing] over the nitya, as in grāmaṇini kule: here, overriding the [augment] num by iko 'ci [vibhaktau, A 7.1.73], even though it is nitya, the shortening [applies] by hrasvo napuṃsake [prātipadikasya, A 1.2.47]; for had num been carried out first, the shortening would not take place, since [the stem] would not [then] end in a vowel (ac). The apavāda [prevailing] over the antaraṅga, as in daityāriḥ and śrīśaḥ: although — overriding even the later savarṇadīrgha [akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ, A 6.1.101] in virtue of being antaraṅga — the [guṇa by] ād guṇaḥ [A 6.1.87] and the yaṇ [substitution, iko yaṇ aci, A 6.1.77] presented themselves, the savarṇadīrgha [takes effect], because it is an apavāda.

akṛtavyūhāḥ pāṇinīyāḥ — akṛta [means] "not done"; vyūha is the discrimination of base and affix (prakṛtipratyayavivecana); those by whom that has not been done are akṛtavyūhāḥ; the pāṇinīyāḥ are Pāṇini's pupils — this is the literal sense. But then [an objection arises:] the entire śāstra would be rendered pointless. Hence, supplying [an implicit qualification], he explains with nimittam, and so on. An illustration is [the form] seduṣaḥ and the like; and that will become clear in the base text itself, in the section on [such] words, on the occasion of the examination of the word sedivas. That this paribhāṣā is baseless and fruitless is made plain in the Paribhāṣenduśekhara.

Thus [ends] the paribhāṣāprakaraṇa in the Bālamanoramā, the commentary on the Siddhāntakaumudī composed by Śrī Vāsudeva Dīkṣita. [The source then appends the header:] Next, the [topics] belonging to the prāg diśaḥ [division].

translator notes

textual The digital source is garbled in places; the translation follows the evidently intended readings without emending the source: paribhāṣāvāhauuṭhsūtre for paribhāṣā vāha ūṭh-sūtre (the Bhāṣya on A 6.4.132); vibhaktinirapekṣatvenāraṅgatvāt for °nirapekṣatvena antaraṅgatvāt; anajantatvādhyasvo for anajantatvād dhrasvo; balavattaparam for balavattaram; stray Vedic-accent signs serve as quotation markers throughout.
textual After the Bālamanoramā colophon to the paribhāṣāprakaraṇa, the source block appends an asterisk divider and the stray section header atha prāgdiśīyāḥ, which is rendered in place at the end of the translation.

← all prakaraṇas outline →