Prakaraṇa 4 · SK 90–110

प्रकृतिभावप्रकरणम्

prakṛtibhāvaprakaraṇam · 21 sūtras

SK 90 · A 6.1.125V

प्लुतप्रगृह्या अचि नित्यम् ॥ ९० ॥

plutapragṛhyā aci nityam

plutapragṛhyā aci nityam (6.1.125) — Pluta [protracted] and pragṛhya vowels invariably (nityam) remain in their natural form (prakṛtyā, undergoing no sandhi) when a vowel (ac) follows.

Rule. A pluta vowel (three mātrās, written 3 after the vowel) and a pragṛhya vowel (a vowel given that name by SK 100–109) invariably (nityam) keep their own form when any vowel (ac) follows. Keeping one's own form is prakṛtibhāva: no sandhi of any kind takes place. The word prakṛtyā, "in its own form", is not written in this sūtra; it comes in by anuvṛtti from an earlier rule. Bhaṭṭoji says the two kinds of vowel "will be defined later": the pluta by SK 93–97, the pragṛhya by SK 100–109.

Example.

ehi kṛṣṇa3 atra → the final a of kṛṣṇa is pluta (SK 95, calling from afar) → a3 + a would take savarṇadīrgha → pluta blocks it → ehi kṛṣṇa3 atra.

harī + etau → the ī of the dual harī is pragṛhya (SK 100) → ī + e would take yaṇ → pragṛhya blocks it → harī etau.

Applies when / blocked by. Only when a vowel follows; before a consonant there is no vowel sandhi to block. Why nityam, "invariably"? Because SK 91 is a rival: it also keeps a pada-final ī in its own form, but shortens it as well. SK 91 is the later sūtra, so by paratva it would win, and harī etau would lose its long ī. The word nityam says that the bare prakṛtibhāva of this rule — no shortening — is the one that must apply. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators put it this way: only the bare prakṛtibhāva of SK 90 is fit to apply here, and nityam is what makes it apply.

Watch out. prakṛtibhāva is not a change; it is the absence of one. When you derive a form, you still write the step, because it records that a rule of chapter 3 was set aside and why.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

प्लुताः प्रगृह्याश्च वक्ष्यन्ते तेऽचि परे नित्यं प्रकृत्या स्युः । एहि कृष्ण 3 अत्र गौश्चरति । हरी एतौ । नित्यम् इति किम् । हरी एतावित्यादावयमेव प्रकृतिभावो यथा स्यात् इकोऽसवर्णे SK 91 इति ह्रस्वसमुच्चितो माभूत् ॥

The pluta and pragṛhya [vowels] will be defined [later]; they, when a vowel (ac) follows, invariably remain in their natural form (prakṛtyā). [Examples:] ehi kṛṣṇa³ atra gauś carati ("Come, Kṛṣṇa! Here a cow is grazing") — [the protracted a of kṛṣṇa³ does not combine with the following a]. harī etau ("these two, Hari…") — [the pragṛhya ī does not become yaṇ]. Why "invariably (nityam)"? So that in harī etau and the like, precisely this prakṛtibhāva [taught here] should obtain, and the prakṛtibhāva combined with shortening (hrasva) by iko 'savarṇe (SK 91) should not arise.

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 33

—एहि कृष्णेति । ‘दूराद्धृते च’ इति कुतः । प्राचा—तु कृष्ण ३ एहि इति उदाहतम् । तदसत् । ‘वाक्यस्य टेः—’ इत्यधिकारात् ॥—ह्रस्वसमुच्चितो मा भूदिति । अयं भावः—हरी ईशावित्यादौ ‘कुतप्रगृह्याः—’ इत्येतत्सावकाशम्, चक्री अत्रेत्यत्र तु ‘इकोऽसवर्णे—’ इति । ततश्च हरी एतावित्यत्र परलाद् ह्रस्वसमुच्चित एव स्यात् । नित्यप्रहणे तु कृते तत्सामर्थ्यात् परमपि वाधत इति ॥—चक्रयत्रेति । इह ‘स्कोः—’ इति कलोपो न, यणः कार्यकालपक्षे वहिरङ्गपरिभाषया असिद्धत्वात् स्थानिवद्भावाच्च । ‘पूर्वत्रासिद्धे न स्थानिवत्’ इति तु नास्ति । ‘तस्य दोषः संयोगादिलोपलल्लित्येषु’ इति वक्ष्यमाणत्वात् ॥—पार्श्वमिति । पर्श्वानां समूहः । ‘पश्चर्या णस् वक्तव्यः’ इति णस् । ओर्गुणस्तु न ‘सिति च’ इति पदत्वस्य भलापवादत्वात्

Bālamanoramā

प्लुतप्रगृह्या अचि नित्यम् - अथ प्रकृतिभाव इति । 'निरूप्यते' इति शेषः । प्लतुप्रगृह्राः । वक्ष्यन्त इति ।दूराद्धूते चे॑त्यादिना, ईदूदेदित्यादिना चेत्यर्थः । प्रकृत्येति । 'प्रकृत्यान्तः पाद' मित्यतदस्तदनुवृत्तेरिति भावः । प्रकृत्या स्वभावेनाऽवस्थिताः स्युरित्यर्थः । सन्धयो न भवन्तीति यावत् । एहि कृष्णा३ अत्रेति ।दूराद्धूते चे॑ति णकारादकारः प्लुतः । तस्य अकारे न सवर्णदीर्घः । हरी एताविति ।ईदूदे॑दिति रेफादीकारः प्रगृह्रः । तस्य यणादेशो न भवति । ननु सर्वत्र विभाषेति पूर्वसूत्रे विभाषेत्यस्याऽस्वरितत्वादेव निवृत्तिसिद्धेरिह नित्यग्रहणं किमर्थमिति पृच्छति-नित्यमिति किमिति । उत्तरमाह-हरी एताविति । नित्यग्रहणे सत्येव हरी एतावित्यादौप्लुतप्रगृह्रा अची॑ त्ययमेव केवलः प्रकृतिभावः स्यादित्यर्थः ।यथा॑शब्दो योग्यतायाम् । अयमेव प्रकृतिभावः प्राप्तुं योग्यः । स च नित्यग्रहणे सति प्राप्नुयादित्यर्थः । एवमग्रेऽप्येवंजातीयकेषु ।एव॑शब्दव्यवच्छेद्यं दर्शयति-इक इति ।इकोऽसवर्णे शाकल्यस्य ह्रस्वश्चे॑ति वक्ष्यमाणः ह्रस्वसमुच्चितः प्रकृतिभावो माभूत्=न भवेत् । माङि लुङ् । सर्वलकारापवादः । अकृते सति नित्यग्रहणे परत्वाच्छाकलह्रस्वसहितप्रकृतिभावः प्रसज्येत । नित्यग्रहणे कृते तु तत्सामर्थ्यादेव परमपि शाकलं ह्रस्वसमुच्चितप्रक-तिभावं 'प्लुतप्रगृह्रा' इति केवलः प्रकृतिभावो बाधत इत्यर्थः ।

plutapragṛhyā aci nityam — As for "now [the section on] prakṛtibhāva": supply "is [now] examined (nirūpyate)." "The pluta and pragṛhya [vowels] will be defined": that is, [the pluta] by dūrād dhūte ca [A 8.2.84] and the like, and [the pragṛhya] by īd ūd ed [dvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam, A 1.1.11] and the like. "In their natural form (prakṛtyā)": because [the word prakṛtyā] recurs (anuvṛtti) from prakṛtyāntaḥpādam [A 6.1.115] — this is the idea. It means: they remain established in their own nature (svabhāva); that is to say, no sandhis take place.

"ehi kṛṣṇā³ atra": by dūrād dhūte ca, the a after the ṇ [of kṛṣṇa, in calling from afar] is pluta; for that [protracted a] there is no savarṇadīrgha before the [following] a. "harī etau": by īd ūd ed [dvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam], the ī after the repha [of the dual harī] is pragṛhya; for that [ī] there is no yaṇ substitution. — Objection: since in the previous sūtra, sarvatra vibhāṣā, the word vibhāṣā is not svarita [not an adhikāra], its discontinuance (nivṛtti) is already established; so what is the purpose of mentioning nityam here? — thus he asks, "why nityam?" He gives the answer with "harī etau": only when nityam is mentioned does, in harī etau and the like, this bare prakṛtibhāva [taught by] plutapragṛhyā aci alone obtain — this is the meaning. The word "yathā" [in Bhaṭṭoji's "yathā syāt"] is in the sense of fitness (yogyatā): this prakṛtibhāva alone is fit to obtain, and it would obtain [only] when nityam is mentioned — this is the meaning. So too further on in cases of this kind.

He shows what is excluded by [Bhaṭṭoji's] word "eva (alone)" with "ik": the prakṛtibhāva combined with shortening (hrasva), to be taught by iko 'savarṇe śākalyasya hrasvaś ca [A 6.1.127], should not arise (mā bhūt = should not occur). [In "mā bhūt,"] after the particle māṅ the aorist (luṅ) [is used]; [this is] an exception (apavāda) to [the use of] all the [other] tenses (lakāras). Were nityam not stated, then by posteriority (paratva) the prakṛtibhāva accompanied by the Śākala shortening would present itself [since iko 'savarṇe is the later rule]. But when nityam is stated, by the very force (sāmarthya) of that [word], the bare prakṛtibhāva [taught by] plutapragṛhyā overrides even the later Śākala [rule's] prakṛtibhāva combined with shortening — this is the meaning.

SK 91 · A 6.1.127V

इकोऽसवर्णे शाकल्यस्य ह्रस्वश्च ॥ ९१ ॥

iko'savarṇe śākalyasya hrasvaśca

iko 'savarṇe śākalyasya hrasvaś ca — In Śākalya's view, a word-final ik [i/u/ṛ/ḷ] before a dissimilar (asavarṇa) vowel [remains in its own form], and [is made] short.

Rule. In Śākalya's view, an ik vowel (i u ṛ ḷ, long or short) at the end of a pada, before a dissimilar (asavarṇa) vowel, keeps its own form and becomes short (hrasva). Because a teacher is named, the rule is optional: the other alternative is ordinary yaṇ.

Example.

cakrī + atra → ī is pada-final ik, a is a dissimilar vowel → Śākalya: ī stays and is shortened to i → cakri atra.

cakrī + atra → the other alternative: iko yaṇ aci → ī becomes y → cakryatra.

Applies when / blocked by. The vowel must end a pada. In gauryau ("two fair ones") the ī of gaurī stands before the ending au, inside the word, so yaṇ is obligatory. Two vārttikas narrow the rule further. na samāse: not in a compound (samāsa) — vāpyām aśvaḥ ("a horse in the tank") compounds to vāpyaśvaḥ, with yaṇ and no option. siti ca: not before a sit affix, one whose marker (it) is s — in pārśvam ("the ribs"), formed from parśu with the sit affix ṆaS, the first vowel of parśu takes vṛddhi (ā) and the final u takes yaṇ (v), giving pārśvam; Śākalya's option does not arise. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators note that these two are one vārttika in the original, which Bhaṭṭoji explains as two.

Watch out. The sūtra prescribes only shortening; it does not say "and no yaṇ". Bhaṭṭoji, following the Bhāṣya, explains that shortening by itself implies keeping the vowel: if Pāṇini had wanted y here he would simply have prescribed yaṇ. So the ca need not be read as carrying prakṛtyā forward; the result is the same.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

पदान्ता इकोऽसवर्णेऽचि परे प्रकृत्या स्युर्ह्रस्वश्च वा । अत्र ह्रस्वविधिसामर्थ्यादेव प्रकृतिभावे सिद्धे तदनुकर्षणार्थश्चकारोन कर्तव्यः इति भाष्ये स्थितम् । चक्रि अत्र । चक्र्यत्र । पदान्ताः इति किम् । गौर्यौ ।

Word-final ik [vowels], before a dissimilar (asavarṇa) vowel, optionally remain in their original form (prakṛtyā) and [become] short. On this, it stands in the Bhāṣya: since prakṛtibhāva is already established by the very force of the injunction of shortening (hrasva-vidhi), the "ca" — whose [purpose would be] to carry that [prakṛtibhāva] forward — need not be made. cakri atra / cakryatra [prakṛtibhāva with short i, and the alternative with yaṇ]. Why "word-final"? [To exclude] gauryau.

vārttika

न समासे

(vārttika) na samāse — [The Śākalya rule does] not [apply] in a compound.

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ वाप्यश्वः ।

(vārttika) — [example:] vāpyaśvaḥ.

vārttika

सिति च

(vārttika) siti ca — And [it does not apply] before a sit [affix].

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ पार्श्वम् ॥

(vārttika) — [example:] pārśvam.

Bālamanoramā

इकोऽसवर्णे शाकल्यस्य ह्रस्वश्च - भाष्यकारमतमाह — अत्र ह्रस्वेति । अत्र चकारो न कर्तव्यः, प्रकृत्येत्यनुकर्षस्य व्यर्थत्वात् । नच विहितस्य ह्रस्वस्य यण्निवृत्त्यर्थः स इति वाच्यं, ह्रस्वविधिसामर्थ्यादेव यणो निवृत्तिसिद्धेः । अन्यथा यणमेव विदध्यात् । अतः प्रकृत्येत्यनुकर्षणार्थश्चकारो न कर्तव्य इति भाष्ये स्थितमित्यर्थः । चक्रि-अत्रेति ह्रस्वमनुच्चितप्रकृतिभावपक्षे रूपम् । तदभावपक्षे तु यणि चक्र्यत्रेति रूपम् । नचात्र ककारस्यस्कोः संयोगाद्यो॑रिति लोपः शङ्क्यः,अचः परस्मि॑न्निति यणः स्थानिवत्त्वेनाऽच्त्वेन पदान्तसंयोगाऽभावात् । नचपूर्वत्रासिद्धे न स्थानिव॑दिति तन्निषेधः शङ्क्यः,तस्य दोषः संयोगादिलोपलत्वणत्वे॑ष्विति वचनात् । न समासे । वार्तिकमेतत् । समासे उक्तशाकलविधिर्न भवतीत्यर्थः । वाप्यआ इति । वाप्यामआ इति विग्रहः । शौण्डादेराकृतिगणत्वात्सुप्सुपेति वा समासः ।सिति च । सकार इद्यस्य स सित्, तस्मिन् परे उक्तः शाकलविधिर्न भवतीत्यर्थः । पार्ामिति । पर्शु=पार्ाआस्थि । पर्शूनां समूहः पार्ाम् ।पर्ाआ णस् वक्तव्यः॑ इति णस् । आदिवृद्धिः । यणादेशः । अत्र पार्शु-अ इति स्थिते उक्तः शाकलो विधिर्न भवति । ओर्गुणस्तु न, भस्यैव तद्विधानात्,सिति चे॑ति पदत्वेन भत्वबाधात् ।अचो ञ्णिती॑ति वृद्धिरपि न भवति, आदिवृद्ध्या तद्बाधात् । तथाच मूलकारो वक्ष्यति-॒आदिवृद्धिरन्त्योपधावृद्धी बाधते॑ इति । अत्र सिन्नित्यसमासयोः शाकलप्रतिषेधः॑ इति वार्तिकं, तदिह द्विधा विभज्य व्याख्यातम् । नचैव सति वोप्यआ इत्यत्र कथं शाकलप्रतिषेधः, तत्र समासस्य वैकल्पिकत्वादिति वाच्यम्, भाष्ये नित्यग्रहणस्य प्रत्याख्यातत्वात् ।

iko 'savarṇe śākalyasya hrasvaś ca — He states the view of the author of the Bhāṣya with "atra hrasva…": here the "ca" need not be made, because carrying forward "prakṛtyā" would be purposeless. Nor should it be said that the "ca" serves to exclude yaṇ for the enjoined short vowel; for the exclusion of yaṇ is established by the very force of the hrasva injunction — otherwise [Pāṇini] would simply have prescribed yaṇ [instead]. Hence the "ca," whose [purpose is] to carry forward "prakṛtyā," need not be made — so it stands in the Bhāṣya. "cakri-atra" is the form on the alternative admitting the short vowel and prakṛtibhāva; but on the alternative without that, with yaṇ, the form is "cakryatra." Nor should one suspect here the elision of the k by "skoḥ saṃyogādyoḥ" [A 8.2.29]; because, by "acaḥ parasmin" [A 1.1.57] the yaṇ has sthānivadbhāva as [standing for] a vowel (ac), there is no pada-final conjunct. Nor should one suspect the prohibition of that [sthānivadbhāva] by "pūrvatrāsiddhe na sthānivat"; because of the statement "tasya doṣaḥ saṃyogādi-lopa-latva-ṇatveṣu" [which restricts that prohibition to conjunct-initial elision, l-substitution, and ṇ-substitution]. "na samāse" — this is a vārttika; meaning, the aforesaid Śākalya-rule does not apply in a compound. "vāpyaśvaḥ" — the analysis is "vāpyām aśvaḥ." Since śauṇḍādi is an ākṛtigaṇa (an open class), the compound [is formed] by "sup supā" optionally. "siti ca" — that of which s is the it-marker is a sit; meaning, before that [a sit affix] the aforesaid Śākalya-rule does not apply. "pārśvam" — parśu = the rib-bone (pārśva-asthi); the collection of ribs (parśus) is "pārśvam." The affix ṆaS by "parśvā ṇas [vaktavyaḥ]"; ādivṛddhi (vṛddhi of the initial); yaṇ-substitution. Here, when "pārśu-a" stands, the aforesaid Śākalya-rule does not apply. But guṇa of the [final] u by "or guṇaḥ" does not [apply], because that is enjoined only for a bha [-stem], and by "siti ca," [the item] being a pada, bha-hood is blocked. And vṛddhi by "aco ñṇiti" [A 7.2.115] also does not apply, being blocked by ādivṛddhi. And thus the root-author (mūlakāra, Bhaṭṭoji) will state: "ādivṛddhi blocks final-vṛddhi and penultimate-vṛddhi." Here the vārttika is "sin-nitya-samāsayoḥ śākala-pratiṣedhaḥ" [prohibition of the Śākalya-rule before a sit and in an obligatory (nitya) compound]; it has here been explained split in two [as "na samāse" and "siti ca"]. And it should not be objected: this being so, how is there prohibition of the Śākalya-rule in "vāpyaśvaḥ," since there the compound is optional (vaikalpika)? — because the word "nitya" [in the vārttika] has been repudiated (pratyākhyāta) in the Bhāṣya.

translator notes

translator "cakri-atra is the form on the alternative admitting the short vowel and prakṛtibhāva" renders "hrasvam anuccita-prakṛtibhāva-pakṣe rūpam"; the qualifier anuccita- is garbled in the source and its precise sense is uncertain (perhaps "admitted/adduced"). The point is unaffected: it names the prakṛtibhāva alternative that retains the short vowel, as against the yaṇ alternative "cakryatra."

SK 92 · A 6.1.128V

ऋत्यकः ॥ ९२ ॥

ṛtyakaḥ

ṛtyakaḥ — For an ak vowel [at the end of a pada], when ṛ follows, [it is optionally shortened and remains in its natural state (prakṛtibhāva)] — the shortening and prakṛtibhāva being carried forward from the preceding rule.

Rule. When ṛ follows, a pada-final ak vowel is treated as in SK 91: optionally shortened and kept in its own form. ak is the pratyāhāra from a to the marker k of the second Śivasūtra, so it adds a and ā to the ik vowels. The words hrasva, ca (bringing prakṛtyā with it) and padānta ("pada-final") are carried forward; asavarṇe is not.

Example.

brahmā + ṛṣiḥ → ā is pada-final ak, ṛ follows → ā is shortened and kept → brahma ṛṣiḥ.

brahmā + ṛṣiḥ → the other alternative: ād guṇaḥ gives ar (the r following the guṇa a) → brahmarṣiḥ.

Applies when / blocked by. SK 91 could not reach brahmā, because ā is not an ik; this rule exists for exactly such cases. Only a pada-final vowel qualifies: in ā ṛcchat ("he went"), the ā is the augment āṭ prefixed to the verb, not the end of a pada, so vṛddhi runs and gives ārcchat. Unlike SK 91, this rule applies even inside a compound; the vārttika na samāse does not extend here: sapta + ṛṣīṇām gives saptaṛṣīṇām (kept) beside saptarṣīṇām (guṇa).

Siddhānta-kaumudī

ऋति परेऽकः प्राग्वत् । ब्रह्म ऋषिः । ब्रह्मर्षिः । पदान्ताः इत्येव । आर्च्छत् । समासेऽप्ययं प्रकृतिभावः । सप्तऋषीणाम् - सप्तर्षीणाम् ॥

When ṛ follows, the ak [is treated] as before (prāgvat) [i.e., optionally shortened and left in prakṛtibhāva]. [Example:] brahma ṛṣiḥ [prakṛtibhāva]; brahmarṣiḥ [guṇa]. Only [as being] at the end of a pada [padāntāḥ still recurs]. [Hence:] ārcchat [where it does not apply]. This prakṛtibhāva [applies] even in a compound (samāsa): saptaṛṣīṇām — saptarṣīṇām.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 33

—ऋत्यकः ॥ ब्रह्म ऋषिरिति । ननु ‘ऋत्यस्य’ इत्येव सूत्रमस्तु । दधि ऋच्छतीत्यादौ ‘इकोऽसवर्णे’ इत्यनेनैव प्रकृतिभावसिद्धेः । मैवम् । होतृऋकार इत्यत्र प्रकृतिभावार्थमग्न्यहणस्यावद्यकलात् । एतेन ‘अकोऽसवर्णे—’ इत्येवमेव सूत्रमस्त्विति शङ्काया निरवकाश एव, उक्तदोषानिवृत्तेः । सस्रकृषीणामित्यत्र ‘न .समासे’ इति निषेधापत्तेश्च । न समासे इति निषेधवार्तिकं हि ‘इकोऽसवर्णे—’ इति सूत्र एव, न तु ‘ऋत्यकः’ इत्यत्रेति सिद्धान्तः । अत एवाह—समासेऽप्ययमिति । एवं च ‘ऋत्यवर्णयोः’ इति पूर्वोक्तो निर्देशः संगच्छते

Bālamanoramā

ऋत्यकः - ऋत्यकः । 'अकः' इति षष्ठी ।शाकल्यस्य ह्रस्वश्चे॑त्यनुवर्तते । असवर्णं इति निवृत्त्म् ।एङः पदान्ता॑दित्यतः पदान्तादित्यनुवर्तते । तच्च षष्ठ्यन्ततया विपरिणम्यते । ततःपदान्तस्याऽक ऋति ह्रस्वो वा स्या॑दित्येकं वाक्यं सम्पद्यते । चकारात्प्रकृत्येत्यनुकृष्यते ।उक्तो ह्रस्वः प्रकृत्या अवतिष्ठते॑ इति द्वितीयं वाक्यं संपद्यते । तदाह — ऋति परेऽकः प्राग्वदिति । ब्राहृ ऋषिरिति । ब्राहृआ — ऋषिरिति स्थिते आकारस्य ह्रस्वः प्रकृतिभावश्च । ततश्चाद्गुण इति परपः अकारो न भवति । अत्रा.ञऽकारस्य इक्त्वाऽभावादिकोऽसवर्णे इत्यप्राप्ते इदं वचनम् । ब्राहृर्षिरिति । उक्तह्रस्वसमुच्चितप्रकृतिभावाऽभावपक्षे आद्गुण इति अकारः । रपरत्वम् ।ऋत्यस्ये॑त्येव तु न सूत्रितम् । होतृ-ऋकार इत्यत्र प्रकृतिभावार्थमग्ग्रहणस्यावश्यरकत्वात् । पदान्ता इत्येवेति । पदान्तग्रहणमत्राप्यनुवर्तनीयमेवेत्यर्थः । आच्र्छदिति । ऋ गतौ । लङ् तिप् शप् । पाघ्राध्मेति ऋच्छादेशः ।इतश्चे॑ति इकारलोपः,आडजादीना॑मित्याडागमः, आटश्चेति वृद्धिः । आ ऋच्छदिति स्थिते आकारस्याऽकः पदान्तत्वाऽभावान्नोक्तः प्रकृतिभावः । न समास इति पूर्वसूत्रस्थं निषेधवार्तिकमिह न संबध्यत इत्याह — समासेऽपीति । सप्तऋषीणामिति ।दिक्संख्ये संज्ञाया॑मिति समासः । सप्तऋषीणासिति प्रकृतिभावपक्षे रूपं तदभावपक्षे तु आद्गुण इति गुणे रपरत्वे सप्तर्षीणामिति भवति ।

ṛtyakaḥ — "akaḥ" is a genitive (ṣaṣṭhī). From [the sūtra] śākalyasya hrasvaś ca, [the words] hrasvaḥ and ca are carried forward (anuvṛtti). The [word] asavarṇe has ceased [is not carried forward]. From [the sūtra] eṅaḥ padāntāt, [the word] padāntāt is carried forward, and it is transformed into ending in the genitive (ṣaṣṭhī) [→ padāntasya]. Then one sentence is formed: "for an ak at the end of a pada, when ṛ follows, there is optionally a short [vowel]." By the ca [in hrasvaś ca], "prakṛtyā" is drawn in (anukarṣaṇa); [and] a second sentence is formed: "the aforesaid short [vowel] remains in its natural state (prakṛtyā avatiṣṭhate)." This he [Bhaṭṭoji] states with "when ṛ follows, the ak [is] as before."

On brahma ṛṣiḥ: when "brahmā ṛṣiḥ" stands, there is shortening of the ā and prakṛtibhāva [→ brahma ṛṣiḥ], and thereby the guṇa vowel a[r] that would arise by ād guṇaḥ does not come about. Here, since the a is not an ik, the [shortening] would not be obtained by iko 'savarṇe [i.e., by śākalyasya hrasvaś ca, which shortens an ik]; hence this rule (vacana) [is given] where [that shortening] is not [otherwise] obtained. On brahmarṣiḥ: on the alternative lacking the prakṛtibhāva combined with the aforesaid shortening, the a[r] [arises] by ād guṇaḥ, [followed by] the ra-para state [by uraṇ raparaḥ]. But [Pāṇini] did not word the sūtra as "ṛtyasya" ["of any vowel before ṛ"], because the mention of "ak" is indispensable for [securing] prakṛtibhāva in a case such as "hotṛ-ṛkāra" [ṛ before ṛ].

On "only [as being] at the end of a pada": the meaning is that the mention of padānta must be carried forward here as well. On ārcchat: [from the root] ṛ (in the sense of motion); [with] laṅ, [the ending] tip, [and the vikaraṇa] śap; by pāghrādhmā... the ṛcchā substitution [ṛ → ṛccha]; by itaś ca, elision of the i [of tip]; by āḍ ajādīnām, the augment āṭ; by āṭaś ca, vṛddhi [ā + ṛ → ār]. When "ā ṛcchat" stands, since the ā (an ak) is not at the end of a pada, the aforesaid prakṛtibhāva does not [apply] [→ vṛddhi → ārcchat]. He states, with "even in a compound," that the prohibitory vārttika (vārttika) "na samāse" ["not in a compound"], found in the previous sūtra, does not connect here. On saptaṛṣīṇām: the compound [is formed] by "dik-saṃkhye saṃjñāyām"; saptaṛṣīṇām is the form on the prakṛtibhāva alternative, while on the alternative without it, by guṇa (ād guṇaḥ) and the ra-para state, it becomes saptarṣīṇām.

translator notes

textual The digital source garbles the recurring example forms; the translation follows the evident readings without emending: brāhṛ / brāhṛā / brāhṛr for brahma / brahmā / brahmar; ācrchat for ārcchat; ikta for ikatva; avaśyaraka for āvaśyaka; stray Vedic-accent marks serve as quotation delimiters.

SK 93 · A 8.2.82वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्त इत्यधिकारः

वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्तः ॥ ९३ ॥

vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ

vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ — The ṭi (final vowel-portion) of a sentence [becomes] pluta and udātta. [This is an adhikāra heading governing the pluta rules that follow.]

Rule. The ṭi of a sentence (vākya) becomes pluta and udātta. The ṭi of a word is its last vowel together with whatever follows that vowel. This sūtra is an adhikāra: it prescribes nothing by itself but is read into SK 94–97, each of which names an occasion. The word padasya, "of a pada", is itself carried into it from earlier, so the ṭi in question is that of a pada.

Example.

saktūn piba devadatta3 → the last pada of the sentence is devadatta → its ṭi is the final a → pluta and udātta: devadatta3 (the occasion is supplied by SK 95).

grāmaṃ gacchāgnici3t → the last pada ends in a consonant → its ṭi is it, the i plus the t → the i is pluta: agnici3t.

Applies when / blocked by. Two words earn their place. vākyasya: without it, "the ṭi of a pada" would protract every word of the sentence; with it, only the last word qualifies. ṭeḥ: without it, the rule would read "the vowel at the end of the sentence", and a sentence ending in a consonant, like gacchāgnicit, would get no pluta; naming the ṭi reaches the vowel inside it.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

इत्यधिकृत्य ॥

Having established [this] as an adhikāra [the pluta prescriptions are begun].

Bālamanoramā

वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्तः - अथ प्लुतप्रगृह्रा इति सूत्राकाङ्क्षितप्लुतप्रगृह्रयोर्मध्ये प्रथमोपात्तप्लुतप्रकरणमारभते — वाक्यस्य टेः ।पदस्ये॑त्यधिकृतम् । वाक्यस्य टेः पदावयवस्य प्लुतो भवति, सच उदात्तो भवतीत्यर्थः । अत्र पदस्येत्यनुवृत्तिर्नश्छव्यप्रशानित्याद्युत्तरार्था, इहानुवृत्तिविच्छेदे उत्तरत्रानुवृत्तेरसंभवात् । वाक्यस्येत्यभावे पदस्य टेरित्युक्ते यावन्ति वाक्ये पदानि तावतां टेः प्लुतः प्रसज्येत ।वाक्यस्ये॑त्युक्ते तु वाक्यस्य टिरन्त्यस्यैव पदस्य संभवतीति न दोषः । टिग्रहणाभावे प्लुतश्रुत्याऽचश्चेति परिभाषयाऽच इत्युपस्थितौ तस्य वाक्यविशेषणत्वात्तदन्तविधावजन्तस्य वाक्यस्येत्यर्थे सत्यलोऽन्त्यपरिभाषया वाक्यान्तस्याचः प्लुत इति पर्यवसानाद्व्रामं गच्छाग्निचि ३ दित्यादिहलन्तवाक्येषु प्लुतो न स्यात् । टिग्रहणे तु तत्सामर्थ्यादेव टिनाऽचो विशेषणाट्टेरवयवस्याचः प्लुत इत्यर्थो लभ्यत इति न दोष इति भाष्ये स्पष्टम् । इत्यधिकृत्येति ।प्लुतविधय आरभ्यन्ते॑ इति शेषः ।

vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ — Now, of the pluta and pragṛhya [topics] required by the sūtra *plutapragṛhyā [aci nityam]* [A 6.1.125], he begins the pluta section, which is taken up first: "vākyasya ṭeḥ." "padasya" is [already] governing (adhikṛta). The ṭi (final vowel and what follows it) of a sentence — [being] a member of a pada — becomes pluta, and that becomes udātta: this is the meaning. Here the anuvṛtti of "padasya" is for the sake of later [rules] such as *naś chavy apraśān* [A 8.3.7]; for if the anuvṛtti were broken here, its continuation later would be impossible.

If "vākyasya" were absent and it were stated [merely] "padasya ṭeḥ," pluta would wrongly apply to the ṭi of as many padas as there are in the sentence. But when "vākyasya" is stated, the ṭi of the sentence is possible only for the final pada [of the sentence]; so there is no fault. Were "ṭi" not mentioned: since "pluta" is heard [as a technical term], and by the paribhāṣā *acaś ca* [only a vowel can be pluta] "ac" would present itself; that being a qualifier of "vākya," under the tadanta-vidhi it would mean "of a sentence ending in a vowel (ajanta)"; then by the *alo 'ntya* paribhāṣā it would finally settle into "the vowel at the end of the sentence is pluta"; and so in sentences ending in a consonant (halanta), such as "grāmaṃ gacchāgnici3t," there would be no pluta. But when "ṭi" is mentioned, by its very force, "ac" being qualified by "ṭi," the meaning obtained is "the vowel (ac) that is a member of the ṭi is pluta"; so there is no fault — this is clear in the Bhāṣya. "ityadhikṛtya" — "the pluta rules are [now] begun" is to be supplied [to complete the elliptical phrase].

translator notes

textual OCR artifacts are present (e.g. 'प्रगृह्रा' for pragṛhyā, 'व्रामं' for grāmaṃ, and the consonant-final example 'गच्छाग्निचि ३ द्' for gacchāgnici3t). The intended readings are followed; nothing is silently emended in the source layer.

SK 94 · A 8.2.83V

प्रत्यभिवादेऽशूद्रे ॥ ९४ ॥

pratyabhivāde'śūdre

In a return-greeting (pratyabhivāda), when [directed] to a non-śūdra (aśūdra), [the ṭi of the sentence becomes pluta and udātta].

Rule. In a return-greeting (pratyabhivāda) addressed to a non-śūdra — a twice-born, dvija — the ṭi of the sentence is pluta and udātta. A pratyabhivāda is the benediction pronounced, according to rule, in answer to a greeting made according to rule.

Example.

Greeting: abhivādaye devadatto 'ham ("I, Devadatta, greet you").

Reply: bho āyuṣmān edhi devadatta → the ṭi of the last pada is the a of devadatta → bho āyuṣmān edhi devadatta3 ("Long life to you, Devadatta!").

Applies when / blocked by. Two vārttikas adjust the rule, and Bhaṭṭoji adds a remark of his own. striyāṃ na: not when the reply is to a woman — abhivādaye gārgy aham is answered bho āyuṣmatī bhava gārgi, with no pluta. Bhaṭṭoji adds that the pluta is wanted only where a personal name or a family name (gotra) ends the reply; in the bare āyuṣmān edhi the i of edhi is not protracted, being neither. bho-rājanya-viśāṃ vā: for the word bhoḥ, and for the names of a kṣatriya or a vaiśya, the pluta is optional — āyuṣmān edhi bhoḥ3, āyuṣmān edhīndravarma3n, āyuṣmān edhīndrapālita3, each also correct without the 3. For bhoḥ the rule would not otherwise apply at all; for the two names it would apply invariably; vā makes both optional. Why "non-śūdra"? The Bhāṣya's example of a reply to a śūdra is kuśaly asi tuṣajaka ("Are you well, Tuṣajaka?"), with no pluta.

Watch out. In indravarma3n the pluta falls on the a before the final n. That is SK 93 at work: the ṭi is an, and the vowel inside it is protracted. The smṛtis that regulate the greeting and the reply are cited by Bhaṭṭoji's commentators; scholars discuss how far they and the Bhāṣya agree.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अशूद्रविषये प्रत्यभिवादे यद्वाक्यं तस्य टेः प्लुतः स्यात् स चोदात्तः । अभिवादये देवदत्तोऽहम् । भो आयुष्मानेधि देवदत्त3 ।

In a return-greeting (pratyabhivāda) directed to a non-śūdra, of whatever sentence [is uttered], its ṭi [the portion from the last vowel onward] becomes pluta (protracted), and that is udātta (acutely accented). [Greeting:] abhivādaye devadatto 'ham ("I, Devadatta, greet [you]"). [Reply:] bho āyuṣmān edhi devadatta3 ("O long-lived one, be Devadatta!" — with pluta, marked "3," on the final vowel).

vārttika

स्त्रियां न

(vārttika) "In [the case of] a woman, not [i.e., the pluta does not apply]."

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ अभिवादये गार्ग्यहम् । भो आयुष्मती भव गार्गि ॥ नाम गोत्रं वा यत्र प्रत्यभिवादवाक्यान्ते प्रयुज्यते तत्रैव प्लुत इष्यते । नेह । आयुष्मानेधि ।

(vārttika.) [Example:] abhivādaye gārgy aham ("I, Gārgī, greet [you]"). bho āyuṣmatī bhava gārgi ("O long-lived one, be Gārgī!"). Where a name (nāma) or a gotra-name is used at the end of the return-greeting sentence, there alone is the pluta desired. Not here: āyuṣmān edhi ("be long-lived").

vārttika

भोराजन्यविशां वेति वाच्यम्

(vārttika) "It should be stated: for bhoḥ and for [names of] a kṣatriya (rājanya) and a vaiśya, [the pluta applies] optionally (vā)."

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ आयुष्मानेधि भोः3 । आयुष्मानेधीन्द्रवर्म3न् । आयुष्मानेधीन्द्रपालित3 ॥

(vārttika.) [Examples:] āyuṣmān edhi bhoḥ3. āyuṣmān edhīndravarma3n. āyuṣmān edhīndrapālita3.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 33–34

—प्रत्यभिवादे—। इह प्रत्यभिवादशब्देन आशीर्वचनमुच्यते ॥ अश्लेष्टे किम् । अभिवादये तुषजकोऽहम् । भो आयुष्मानेधि तुषजक ॥—आयुष्मानेधीति । अस्तेः सेर्हिः । ‘ध्वसोः—’ इति एत्वम् ‘हुन्नाल्भ्यो हेर्धिः’ ‘श्रसोरल्लोपः’ ॥—नाम गोत्रं वेति । गोत्रस्योदाहरणम्—अभिवादये गार्ग्योऽहम् । भो आयुष्मानेधि गार्ग्यं ३ इत्यूह्यम्

Bālamanoramā

प्रत्यभिवादेअशूद्रे - प्रत्यभिवादेऽशूद्रे ।वाक्यस्य टेःप्लुत उदात्त॑ इत्यधिकृतम् । अशूद्र इति च्छेदः । न शूद्रः अशूद्रः=द्विजातिः । तद्विषयः प्रत्यभिवादः=विधिवदभिवादयमानं प्रति विधिवदाशीर्वचनम् । भावे घञ् । अस्मिन् प्रत्यभिवादे विषये यद्वाक्यं तस्य टेः प्लुतः स्यात्स चोदात्त इत्यर्थः । अभिवादविधिमाह — आपस्तम्बः-॒दक्षिणं बाहुं श्रोत्रसमं प्रसार्य ब्राआहृणोऽभिवादयीत, उरःसमं राजन्यः, मध्यसमं वैश्यः, नीचैः शूद्रः । 'प्राञ्जलि' इति ।तिष्ठन्ताप्रातरभिवादमभिवादयीतासावहं भोः॑ इति च । 'असा' विति स्वनामनिर्देशोऽभिमतः । 'देवदत्तोऽहं भो' इति ब्राउवन् अभिवादम्ाशीर्वचनम् । अभिवदायीत=वक्तव्यत्वेन विज्ञापयेत् । ततश्च यथा वर्णं दक्षिणं वाहुं प्रसार्यअभिवादये देवदत्तोऽहं भोः॑ इति ब्राऊयादित्यर्थः । अयमभिवादनप्रकारः । प्रत्यभिवादनप्रकारस्तु मनुना दर्शितः-आयुष्मान् भव सौम्येति विप्रो वाच्योऽभिवादने । अकांरश्चास्य नाम्नोऽन्ते वाच्यः पूर्वाक्षरः प्लुतः॥॑ इति । अत्र नाम्नो ।ञन्ते इति वचनादायुष्मान् भव सौम्येत्यनन्तरमबिवादयमानस्य नाम संबुद्ध्यन्तं प्रयोक्तव्यमिति स्मृत्यन्तरसिद्धमनुगृहीतं भवति । अस्य नाम्नोऽन्ते अक#आरश्चा वाच्यः=प्रयोज्यः । तस्मादकारात्पूर्वाक्षरः=पूर्वोऽच् प्लुतः प्रयोक्तव्य इत्यर्थः । एवंचआयुष्मान् भव सौम्य देवदत्त३ अ॑ इति प्रत्यभिवादवाक्यं संपन्नमिति स्थितिः ।अभिवादये देवदत्तोऽहट॑मिति अभिवादवाक्यप्रदर्शनम् । भो इत्यस्याप्युपलक्षणम् । आयुष्मान् भव देवदत्त ३ इति प्रत्यभिवादवाक्यप्रदर्शनम् । 'अभिवादये' इत्यस्य अबिवादमाशीर्वचनं वक्तव्यत्वेन विज्ञापयामीत्यर्थः । भवेत्यनन्तरं सौम्यशब्दस्य देवदत्त इत्यनन्तरमकारस्याप्युपलक्षणम् । अत्र देवदत्तशब्दे तकारादकारस्य प्लुतः । आयुष्मत्त्वस्य विधेयत्वात्संबोधनविभक्त्यभावः । अत्र प्रत्यभिवादवाक्ये शर्मान्तं ब्राआहृणस्येत्यादि न भवति, एचोऽप्रगृह्रस्येति सूत्रे शर्मादिशब्दं विना केवलस्य नाम्नो भाष्ये उदाहरणात्, उक्तमन्वादिस्मृतिविरोधाच्च ।अशूद्र इति किम् ॒कुशल्यसि तुषजक॑ इति भाष्यम् । एवंच शूद्रविषये आयुष्मान् भवेति न प्रयोक्तव्यमिति गम्यते ।अशूद्रस्त्र्यसूयकेष्विति वक्तव्य॑मिति वार्तिकम् । शूद्रविषय एव प्लुतप्रतिषेधो न भवति, किंतु शूद्रवत्स्त्रीविषये असूयकविषयेऽपि प्लुतप्रतिषेधो भवतीति वक्तव्यमित्यर्थः ।तत्र शूद्रविषये उदाहृतम् । स्त्रीविषये वार्तिकं विभज्यार्थतः संगृह्णाति — स्त्रियां नेति । स्त्रीविषयकप्रत्यभिवादवाक्ये उक्तो विधिर्न भवतीत्यर्थः ।अभिवादये गाग्र्यह॑मिति अभिवादनवाक्ययोर्नाम्नो गोत्रस्य च विकल्पः । तदाह-नाम गोत्रं वेति । अत्र नामशब्देनद्वादशेऽहनि पिता नाम कुर्या॑दिति विहितं नामैव गृह्रते । अत एवआयुष्मान्भव दण्डि॑न्नित्यादौ प्लुतो नेति भाष्ये स्पष्टम् ।नाम गोत्रं वे॑ति परिगणनस्य प्रयोजमाह — नेहेति । आयुष्मानेधीति । अस्तेस्सिप् हिः । ध्वसोरित्येत्वं, हेर्धिः ।श्नसोरल्लोपः॑ । अत्र धकारादिकारस्य न प्लुतः, अनामत्वादगोत्रत्वाच्च । भोराजन्यविशाम् । भोस्शब्दस्य राजन्यवैश्यवाचकनाम्नोश्च टेः प्लुतो वा स्यादिति वक्तव्यमित्यर्थः । भोस्शब्दस्याऽप्राप्ते इतरयोस्तु नामत्वात्प्राप्ते विभाषेयम् । तत्र भोस्शब्दे यथा-आयुष्मनेधि बोः ३ । देवदत्त भोः॑ इति भाष्यम् । अत #एव प्रत्यभिवादवाक्यान्ते नाम्नोऽनन्तरं भोश्शब्दस्य भवशब्देन एधिशब्दस्य च प्रयोगाविकल्पो गम्यते । राजन्ते यथा-आयुष्मानेधि इन्द्रवर्म३न्, इन्द्रवर्मन् । वैश्ये यथा-आयुष्मनेधि इन्द्रपालित३, इन्द्रपालित इति भाष्यम् । अत एव भाष्यात् प्रत्यभिवादवाक्ये शर्मान्तं ब्राआहृणस्य वर्मान्तं क्षत्रियस्य पालितान्तं वैश्यस्येति विधयोऽपि प्रवर्तन्त इति गम्यते । उक्तभाष्यमन्वादिस्मृतिविरोधाद्विकल्पः । अत्र भाष्ये अपर आहेत्युक्त्या प्रत्यभिवादे सर्वस्यैव नाम्नो भोश्शब्द आदेशो वक्तव्य इति पठित्वा आयुष्मानेधि भो इत्येतावदेव सर्वत्र प्रत्यभिवादवाक्यमित्युक्तम् ।

pratyabhivāde 'śūdre — pratyabhivāde 'śūdre. [The phrase] vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ ("the ṭi of the sentence [becomes] pluta and udātta," A 8.2.82) remains in force as adhikāra. The word-division is aśūdre. "Not a śūdra" = aśūdra, i.e., a twice-born (dvijāti). A return-greeting directed to such [a person]: pratyabhivāda = the pronouncing of a benediction according to rule (vidhivat) toward one who greets according to rule; [the word] is [formed] with the affix ghañ in the sense of the action (bhāva). The meaning: in the context of this return-greeting, of whatever sentence [is uttered], its ṭi becomes pluta, and that is udātta.

[Vāsudeva] states the rule of greeting: Āpastamba — "A brāhmaṇa should greet stretching out his right arm level with his ear, a kṣatriya (rājanya) level with his chest, a vaiśya level with his middle [waist], a śūdra low — with joined palms (prāñjali)." And: "Standing, [each day] until the morning [greeting], he should announce the greeting: 'It is I, so-and-so (asau), sir (bhoḥ).'" By "asau" the statement of one's own name is intended. Saying "devadatto 'haṃ bhoḥ" ("It is I, Devadatta, sir"), he "should announce (abhivādayīta)" the greeting-benediction (abhivāda = āśīrvacana) — i.e., he should make it known as [something] to be spoken. And so the meaning is: according to one's varṇa, stretching out the right arm, one should say "abhivādaye devadatto 'haṃ bhoḥ" ("I greet [you]; it is I, Devadatta, sir"). This is the manner of greeting (abhivādana).

The manner of the return-greeting, however, is shown by Manu: "In a greeting, a brāhmaṇa (vipra) is to be addressed with 'āyuṣmān bhava saumya' ('Be long-lived, gentle one'); and an a is to be pronounced at the end of his name, [and] the preceding syllable [made] pluta." Here, by the statement "at the end of the name," it is confirmed — as established by another smṛti — that after "āyuṣmān bhava saumya" the name of the one greeting, ending in a vocative (saṃbuddhi), is to be employed. And at the end of this name an a is to be pronounced = employed. The meaning: the syllable preceding that a — i.e., the preceding ac (vowel) — is to be employed as pluta. Thus the return-greeting sentence comes out as "āyuṣmān bhava saumya devadatta3 a" — so it stands.

"abhivādaye devadatto 'ham" — this is a display of the greeting-sentence; and it is also a representative token (upalakṣaṇa) for [the inclusion of] bho. "āyuṣmān bhava devadatta3" — this is a display of the return-greeting sentence. The word abhivādaye means: "I make known, as [something] to be spoken, the greeting (abhivāda) — [i.e.] a benediction." [The example] is also a representative token for the word saumya [coming] after bhava and for the a [coming] after devadatta. Here, in the word devadatta, the a following the t [its final a] is pluta. Because "being long-lived" (āyuṣmattva) is what is being predicated (vidheya), there is no vocative case-ending [on āyuṣmān].

In this return-greeting sentence, [the rule] that a brāhmaṇa's [name] ends in -śarman, and so forth, does not apply — because in the Bhāṣya on the sūtra eco 'pragṛhyasya (A 8.2.107) the example is a bare name without a word like śarman, and because [applying it] would conflict with the aforementioned smṛti of Manu and others. "Why 'aśūdra'?" — [The Bhāṣya answers:] kuśaly asi tuṣajaka ("Are you well, Tuṣajaka?") — this is the Bhāṣya [example, showing no pluta for a śūdra]. And so it is understood that, in the case of a śūdra, "āyuṣmān bhava" is not to be employed.

There is a vārttika: "It should be stated: aśūdra-strī-asūyakeṣu." The meaning: the prohibition of pluta occurs not only in the case of a śūdra, but — it should be stated — the prohibition of pluta occurs, just as for a śūdra, also in the case of a woman and in the case of a fault-finder (asūyaka). Of these, the śūdra case has been exemplified. The [case of a] woman — [Bhaṭṭoji] captures the vārttika, taking it in its distributed sense (arthataḥ), with striyāṃ na. The meaning: in a return-greeting sentence directed to a woman, the aforesaid operation [pluta] does not apply.

"abhivādaye gārgy aham" — [here] in the [pair of] greeting-sentences there is an option (vikalpa) between the [personal] name (nāma) and the gotra. This [Bhaṭṭoji] states with nāma gotraṃ vā ("a name or a gotra"). Here, by the word nāma, [what is meant is] precisely the name enjoined by [the smṛti] "on the twelfth day the father should give a name." For just this reason it is clear in the Bhāṣya that in "āyuṣmān bhava daṇḍin" and the like there is no pluta [daṇḍin being an epithet, not such a name]. He states the purpose of the enumeration "a name or a gotra" with neha ("not here"). āyuṣmān edhi — [derivation:] to the root as ("to be") is added sip [second person], which [becomes] hi; by dhvasoḥ [see note] there is e-substitution (etva); hi [becomes] dhi by her dhiḥ (A 6.4.101); and the a is elided by śnasor allopaḥ (A 6.4.111). Here the i following the dh [the i of edhi] is not pluta, because it is neither a name nor a gotra.

bhorājanyaviśām — the meaning: it should be stated that the ṭi of the word bhoḥ, and of names denoting a kṣatriya (rājanya) or a vaiśya, optionally (vā) becomes pluta. For the word bhoḥ [the pluta] is not otherwise obtained (aprāpta), whereas for the other two, being names, it is obtained (prāpta); [so] this is an option [covering both] (vibhāṣā). Of these, for the word bhoḥ, as in the Bhāṣya: "āyuṣmān edhi bhoḥ3. devadatta bhoḥ." For just this reason it is understood that at the end of a return-greeting sentence, after the name, there is an optional employment of the word bhoḥ, together with the word bhava or the word edhi. For a kṣatriya, as in: "āyuṣmān edhi indravarma3n" [with pluta], "indravarman" [without]. For a vaiśya, as in the Bhāṣya: "āyuṣmān edhi indrapālita3" [with pluta], "indrapālita" [without]. From this very Bhāṣya it is understood that the injunctions too apply in the return-greeting sentence — namely that a brāhmaṇa's [name] ends in -śarman, a kṣatriya's in -varman and a vaiśya's in -pālita. Because the aforesaid Bhāṣya conflicts with the smṛti of Manu and others, [the matter remains] optional (vikalpa). Here in the Bhāṣya, with the words "another says (apara āha)," having stated "in a return-greeting, bhoḥ is to be prescribed as the substitute for every name whatsoever," it is said that everywhere the return-greeting sentence is just this much: "āyuṣmān edhi bho."

translator notes

textual The Devanāgarī source is corrupt in many places; the translation follows the evidently intended readings without emending the source: brāhmaṇa is repeatedly written brāāhṛṇa, brūyāt as brāūyāt, akāra as ak#āra, and stray Vedic-accent marks serve as quotation markers throughout. The quoted Āpastamba clause 'tiṣṭhann āprātar abhivādam...' is rendered as evidently intended.
translator In the derivation of edhi the source names the etva step as 'dhvasoḥ,' which is not a recognizable sūtra reference and appears corrupt; the derivational steps are preserved as the commentary gives them, without supplying an emended rule-name, and the remaining steps (seḥ hy apic ca, etc.) are left implicit as in the source.

SK 95 · A 8.2.84V

दूराद्धूते च ॥ ९५ ॥

dūrāddhūte ca

dūrād dhūte ca (8.2.84) — and in calling from afar (dūrāt), [the ṭi (final vowel-segment) of the sentence becomes pluta and udātta].

Rule. Also when someone is addressed (sambodhana) from afar, the ṭi of the sentence is pluta and udātta. "Afar" means a distance at which the hearer cannot catch ordinary speech and extra effort of voice is needed.

Example.

saktūn piba devadatta ("Drink the gruel, Devadatta!") → said from afar → the ṭi of devadatta is its final a → saktūn piba devadatta3.

Applies when / blocked by. Bhaṭṭoji reads hūta, "calling", as sambodhana, address in general, not as the act of summoning. If it meant summoning, the rule would need an explicit word of calling, as in ehi devadatta ("come, Devadatta"); read as address, it applies to any sentence spoken to someone far off, as the example shows.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

दूरात्संबोधने यद्वाक्यं तस्य टेः प्लुतः स्यात् । सक्तून्पिब देवदत्त3 ॥

When there is address (sambodhana) from afar, [in] whatever sentence [is used], its ṭi (final vowel-segment) becomes pluta (protracted). [Example:] saktūn piba devadatta3 ("Drink the barley-gruel, O Devadatta!" — the final a of devadatta protracted to the three-mora pluta, marked "3").

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 34

—दूराद्धूते चेति । हूतमाह्वानं तच्च संबोधनमात्रोपलक्षणमित्याह—दूरात्संबोधन इति । उपलक्षणतया व्याख्यानस्य फलमुदाहरति—सकून्पिवेत्यादि ॥—गुरोरनृतः—॥—अनन्त्यस्यापीति । अत्र वदन्ति । यद्यप्यन्त्यस्य गुरोः क्षुतार्थोऽपिशब्द इति व्याख्यायेत तर्हि गुरुस्थानिकक्षुतानामेव पर्यायता स्यात्तथाच ‘दूराद्धूते—’ इति लक्षणान्तरेण लघोष्टेः स्थाने विहितेन क्षुतेन सह युगपत् प्रयोगः प्रसज्येत । तस्मादपिशब्दो गुरोरगुरोश्च टेः क्षुतार्थं इत्येव व्याख्यातव्यं टेरिति प्रकृतत्वादिति ॥—दे३वदत्तेति । वाक्यत्वसंपत्तये अस्यादिरेहीति शब्दो बोध्यः । एवमग्रेऽपि ॥—सर्वः क्षुतो विकल्प्यत इति । एतेन द्वैपायनो विरहकातर आजुहाव । पुत्रेति इति भागवतं व्याख्यातम् । ‘क्षुतस्य वैकल्पिकत्वादार्थः प्रयोगः’ इति श्रीधराचार्योक्तिस्तु नादत्वं व्याख्यातम् । विस्तरस्त्वत्र मनोरमायामनुसंधेयः ॥—यणादिकं करोतीति । अत्र नव्याः । यद्येवं अग्नी इति विष्णू इति इत्यत्र प्रगृह्याश्रयप्रकृतिभावं वाधित्वा परत्वादनेन यणादिकार्यं स्यात् ततश्च वत्करणप्रयोजनं यणादिकमेव स्यात्, तस्मात् ‘क्षुतकार्यं प्रकृतिभावं न करोतीत्यर्थः’ इति प्राचां व्याख्यैव व्यायसी । एवं च ‘इको यणचि’ इत्यत्र इग्प्रहणस्य वैयर्थ्यशङ्कापि नास्ति । तथाहि—तत्रेग्प्रहणाभावेऽपि ‘हस्वस्य पिति कृति तुक्’ ‘दीर्घात्’ इत्यतो हस्वदीर्घपदानुवृत्त्या तयोर्यण्विधानान्न व्यजनस्य भविष्यति । क्षुतस्य तु प्रकृतिभावेनैव भवितव्यमेव । अयादयोऽपवादाः हरय इत्यादौ । उपेन्द्रः कृणैकत्वमित्यादौ तु ‘आहुणः’ ‘वृद्धिरेचि’ इति वाधके भविष्यतः । यथा सत्यपि इग्प्रहणे श्रीश इत्यादौ सवर्णदीर्घत्वं वाधकम् । अतो नार्थं इग्प्रहणेन । तथापि एहि करभोरु ३ इति सुतनु ३ इति चिनुहि ३ अत्रेत्यादौ ‘अक्षुतवदुपस्थिते’ ‘ई ३ चाक्रवर्मणस्य’ इति प्रकृतिभावनिषेधेऽपि आभ्यां यणादिकार्याऽविधानात् क्षुतस्यास्य यण् न स्यात् । हस्वदीर्घपदाननुवृत्तौ तु व्यजनस्य स्यात् । तस्मादिग्प्रहणं व्यर्थमिति न शक्यते शङ्कितुमित्याहुः ॥ अन्ये त्विग्प्रहणस्य प्रयोजनान्तरमप्याहुः । इको यणेव क्वचिद्यथा स्यात् यदन्यत् प्राप्नोति तन्मा भूत् । किंचान्यत् प्राप्नोति ‘इकोऽसवर्णे—’ इति शाकलम् । एवं च यदुक्तं ‘न समासे’ ‘सिति च’ इति तदनेन संगृहीतं भवतीति ॥—चिनु हीति । चिन्विति लोडन्तम् । हीत्यव्ययम् । अनन्त्यस्यापि ‘प्रश्नाख्यानयोः’ इत्यनेन क्षुतः ॥—उभयत्र विभाषेयमिति । इतिशब्दे परतः पूर्वेण प्राप्ते अन्यत्राप्राप्ते चारम्भादिति भावः ॥—ईदूदेदन्तमिति । अत्र विशेषणेन तदन्तविध्याश्रयणं किम् । पचेते इमाविति यथा स्यात् । हरी विष्णू इत्यादिष्वेकादेशस्य परादिवद्भावाश्रयेण ईकारादीनां द्विवचनत्वादीदूदेद्रूपं द्विवचनमित्युक्तेऽपि प्रगृह्यत्वं सिध्यतीति बोध्यम् ॥—द्विवचनमिति । ‘संज्ञाविधौ प्रत्ययप्रहणे तदन्तप्रहणं नास्ति’ ‘सुप्तिडन्तम्—’ इत्यन्तप्रहणाज्ज्ञापकात्तेन कुमार्यार्वध्वोश्चागारं कुमार्यगारं वध्वगारमिति सिद्धम् । द्विवचनान्तं प्रगृह्यं स्यादिति व्याकुर्वतः प्राचस्तु नेदं सिध्येत् ॥—हरी एताविति । इह हस्वसमुच्चितप्रकृतिभावो न, ‘क्षुतप्रगृह्याः—’ इत्यत्र नित्यप्रहणादित्युक्तम् ॥ अत्र वृत्तिकारेण ‘मणीवादीनां प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः’ इति पठित्वा मणीव रोदसीव जंपतीवेत्युदाहृतम् । तच्च मुनित्रयानुक्तत्वादप्रमाणमिति कैयटादयः । एवं स्थिते ‘मणीवोष्ट्रस्य लम्बेते प्रियौ वत्सतरौ मम’ इति भारतप्रयोगं समर्थयते—इवार्थे इति ॥—वशब्द इत्यादि । ‘वं प्रचेतसि जानीयादिवार्थे च तदव्ययम्’ इति मेदिनी । ‘व वा यथा तथैवैत्रं साम्ये—’ इत्यमरः । ‘कादम्बखण्डितदलानि व पङ्कजानि’ इत्यादिप्रयोगदर्शनाच्चेति भावः

Bālamanoramā

दूराद्धूते च - दूराद्धूते च । यत्र प्रदेशे स्थितस्य प्रयत्नोच्चारितं बोध्यमानो न शृणोति किं त्वधिकं प्रयत्नमपेक्षते तद्दूरम् । हूतमाह्वानं । भावे क्तः । तच्च सम्बोधनमिह विवक्षितम् ।वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्त॑ इत्यधिकृतम् । तदाह-दूरात्सम्बोधन इत्यादिना । यदि तु आह्वानमेवात्रं विवक्षितं स्यात्तर्हि एहि देवदत्तेत्यादावाह्वानवाचकपदे सत्येव स्यात् । सम्बोधनपरत्वे तु तदन्यत्रापि भवतीत्यभि प्रेत्योदाहरति — सक्तूनिति ।

dūrād dhūte ca — dūrād dhūte ca. That region, standing at which the person to be made aware does not hear what is uttered with [ordinary] effort but requires additional effort — that is "dūra" (distant). "hūta" = calling (āhvāna); [with] the [suffix] kta in the sense of the action (bhāve ktaḥ). And that [calling] is here intended [specifically] as sambodhana (address). "vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ" (A 8.2.82) is the governing adhikāra. He states this with "dūrāt sambodhane…" and the rest. For if [mere] āhvāna (calling) were intended here, then [pluti] would apply only when a word denoting calling is present, as in "ehi devadatta" ("come, Devadatta"). But on the interpretation as sambodhana it occurs elsewhere too [i.e. even where no explicit calling-word stands]; with this intention he illustrates: "saktūn…".

SK 96 · A 8.2.85V

हैहेप्रयोगे हैहयोः ॥ ९६ ॥

haiheprayoge haihayoḥ

haiheprayoge haihayoḥ — When [the vocative particles] hai and he are employed, the pluta (three-mātrā protraction) occurs [only] for [the vowel of] hai / he.

Rule. When the particles hai or he are used in a sentence of calling from afar, the pluta falls on hai or he alone. hai and he are two indeclinables (avyaya) that signal address. This is a niyama, a restricting rule: the pluta was already available by SK 95 and SK 97, and this sūtra fixes where it may go.

Example.

he rāma → he is used, calling from afar → the pluta goes to he → he3 rāma.

rāma hai → likewise → rāma hai3.

pāhi hai rāma → only hai is protracted, not the a of rāma → pāhi hai3 rāma.

Applies when / blocked by. Without this rule, SK 97 would allow the final vowel of another word to be protracted too; haihayoḥ, "of hai and he", shuts that out. The word prayoga, "employment", is also necessary. Without it, the heading vākyasya ṭeḥ would confine the pluta to a sentence-final hai, as in rāma hai3; with it, hai and he are protracted even when they are not final, as in he3 rāma.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

एतयोः प्रयोगे दूराद्धूते यद्वाक्यं तत्र हैहयोरेव प्लुतः स्यात् । हे3 राम । राम है3 ॥

When these two [hai and he] are employed, in a sentence used in calling from afar (dūrād āhvāne), the pluta occurs there only for hai / he. [Examples:] he³ rāma; rāma hai³.

Bālamanoramā

हैहेप्रयोगे हैहयोः - हैहेप्रयोगे । है हे इत्यव्यये सम्बोधनद्योतके । तयोः प्रयोगे हैहयोः प्लुतः स्यादित्यर्थः । पूर्वसूत्रेण गुरोरनृत इत्यनेन च सिद्धे किमर्थमिदमित्याशङ्क्य नियमार्थमिति व्याचष्टे — हैहयोरेवेति । हैहयोरेवेति नियमार्थमिति बावः । पाहि है३ राम, पाहि हे३ रामेत्यत्र हैहयोरेव प्लुतो न तु गुररोनृत इत्यन्त्यस्यापीत्येतद्धैहयोरित्यनेन लभ्यत इति यावत् । प्रयोगग्रहणाभावे वाक्यस्य टेरित्यधिकाराद्राम है३ राम हे३ इत्यत्रैव स्यादतःप्रयोग॑ग्रहणम् । ततश्चाऽनन्त्ययोरपि तयोः प्लुतो भवति ।

haiheprayoge haihayoḥ — haiheprayoge. hai and he are two indeclinables (avyaya) indicative of address (sambodhana). The meaning is: when these two are employed, the pluta occurs for hai / he. Since [the pluta] is already established by the previous sūtra and by "guror anṛtaḥ..." (A 8.2.86), [Bhaṭṭoji] anticipates the doubt "what is the purpose of this [sūtra]?" and explains that it is for restriction (niyama), [with the word] "haihayor eva" (only for hai / he). The idea is that "haihayor eva" conveys a restriction: in "pāhi hai³ rāma," "pāhi he³ rāma," the pluta is only for hai / he, and not — as "guror anṛtaḥ..." would [otherwise] permit — for the final [vowel of another word] as well; this [restriction] is what is obtained from [the word] "haihayoḥ." Were "prayoga" (employment) not mentioned, then, owing to the governing heading "vākyasya ṭeḥ" [the pluta being of the final vowel (ṭi) of the sentence], it would occur only in "rāma hai³," "rāma he³" [where hai / he stand sentence-final]; hence the mention of "prayoga." And thereby the pluta occurs for those two [hai / he] even when they are non-final (an-antya) [as in he³ rāma].

SK 97 · A 8.2.86V

गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्याप्येकैकस्य प्राचाम् ॥ ९७ ॥

guroranṛto'nantyasyāpyekaikasya prācām

guror anṛto 'nantyasyāpy ekaikasya prācām — In the opinion of the Eastern grammarians (prācām), each single guru [heavy] vowel other than ṛ, even a non-final one, [is optionally protracted (pluta) in a sentence used to call from afar].

Rule. In the view of the Eastern grammarians (prācām), in a sentence of calling from afar, each single heavy (guru) vowel of the word addressed, other than ṛ, may be protracted even when it is not the final vowel — one vowel at a time. Because a school is named, the rule is optional.

Example.

ehi devadatta (the ehi, "come", must be understood, so that there is a sentence) → the heavy e is protracted → de3vadatta.

ehi devadatta → the heavy a before the cluster tt is protracted → devad3atta.

ehi devadatta → the final a is protracted (by SK 93 and 95, whether heavy or not) → devadatta3.

Applies when / blocked by. Why guru? So that the light a after v in devadatta is never protracted. Why "other than ṛ"? In kṛṣṇa3 only the final a can be pluta; the heavy ṛ is excluded. Why ekaika, "each single one"? For alternation: one heavy vowel is protracted in each utterance, never all of them at once. The final vowel gets its pluta from the heading ṭeḥ of SK 93; this rule adds the non-final heavy ones.

Watch out. Bhaṭṭoji splits the sūtra in two (yoga-vibhāga): the first rule ends at ekaikasya, and prācām stands as a rule on its own into which only pluta is carried. Its meaning is then "pluta is in the opinion of the Easterners", and the effect is that every pluta in the grammar becomes optional. That is why no separate vārttika is needed to make all pluta optional.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

दूराद्धूते यद्वाक्यं तस्य ऋद्भिन्नस्यानन्त्यस्यापि गुरोर्वा प्लुतः स्यात् । दे3 वदत्त । देवद3त्त । देवदत्त3 । गुरोः किम् । वकारात्परस्याकारस्य मा भूत् । अनृतः किम् । कृष्ण3 । एकैकग्रहणं पर्यायार्थम् । इह प्राचाम् इति योगो विभज्यते । तेन सर्वः प्लुतो विकल्प्यते ॥

In a sentence [uttered] when calling from afar (dūrād dhūte), a guru [heavy vowel] — other than ṛ, even a non-final one — is optionally protracted (pluta). [Examples:] de3vadatta; devad3atta; devadatta3. Why "guru"? So that [it may] not [apply] to the a following the v [in devadatta, which is light]. Why "other than ṛ (anṛtaḥ)"? [Example:] kṛṣṇa3 [where only the final a, not the ṛ, is protracted]. The mention "each single one (ekaika)" is for the sake of alternation (paryāya) [one at a time]. Here the sūtra is split (yoga-vibhāga) so that "prācām" [stands as a separate rule]. By that [split], every pluta is made optional.

Bālamanoramā

गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्याप्येकैकस्य प्राचाम् - गुरोरनृतः ।दूराद्धूते चे॑त्यनुवर्तते ।वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्त॑ इत्यधिकृतं । दूरात्सम्बोधने यद्वाक्यं तत्र सम्बोध्यमानवाचकं यत्पदं तदवयवस्य ऋकारभिन्नस्याऽनन्त्यस्य गुरोः प्लुतः स्यात्, अन्त्यस्य तु गुरोरगुरोश्च स्यादित्यर्थः । टेरपिना समुच्चयात् । तदाह — दूरादित्यादिना । दे३वदत्तेत्यादिषु सर्वत्रएही॑ति शब्दः प्राग्ध्याहर्तव्यः । अन्यथाएकतिङ् वाक्य॑मिति वाक्यत्वानुपपत्तेः । पर्यायार्थमिति । अन्यथा सर्वेषां गुरूणां युगपत् प्लुतः स्यादिति भावः । इह प्राचामिति ।गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्याप्येकैकस्ये॑त्येकं वाक्यं,प्राचा॑मित्यन्यत् । तत्र 'प्लुत' इत्येवानुवर्तते । प्राचां मते प्लुतः स्यान्नान्यमते इति फलति । ततः किमित्यत आह-तेनेति । एवं चसर्वः प्लुतः साहसमनिच्छता विभाषा वक्तव्य॑ इति वार्तिकं न कर्तव्यमिति भावः । प्लुतशास्त्रत्यागात्मकं साहसमनिच्छतेत्यर्थः । प्लुतशास्त्रेषु श्रद्धाजाडं विहायेति यावत् । अप्लुतवत् ।किमिदमुपस्थितं नाम अनार्षमितिकरण॑मिति भाष्यम् । अवैदिक इतिशब्द इत्यर्थः । 'प्लुत' इत्यध्याहार्यम् । अवैदिके इतिशब्दे परे प्लुतोऽप्लुतवत्स्यादिति फलति ।

guror anṛto 'nantyasyāpy ekaikasya prācām — [The words] "dūrād dhūte ca" are carried forward (anuvṛtti); [the words] "vākyasya ṭeḥ pluta udāttaḥ" are the governing adhikāra. In a sentence used for addressing from afar, of the word denoting the one being addressed, a component vowel that is a guru other than ṛ, even if non-final, gets pluta; while the final [vowel], whether guru or non-guru, gets [pluta] — that is the meaning; because of the conjunction (samuccaya), by "api," with [the adhikāra] "ṭeḥ" [the final portion]. This he states with "when [calling] from afar," etc. In de3vadatta and the rest, in every case the word "ehi" ["come!"] must be supplied before [them]; otherwise, by [the definition] "ekatiṅ vākyam" ["a sentence has one finite verb"], their status as a sentence would not obtain.

On "for the sake of alternation": otherwise all the gurus would get pluta simultaneously — this is the idea. On "here prācām": "guror anṛto 'nantyasyāpy ekaikasya" is one sentence [rule]; "prācām" is another, in which only "pluta" is carried forward. It results that pluta occurs in the opinion of the Easterners (prācām), not in another's opinion. [Q:] What follows from that? He answers with "thereby (tena)": and thus the vārttika (vārttika) "sarvaḥ plutaḥ sāhasam anicchatā vibhāṣā vaktavyaḥ" ["for one not wishing rashness, every pluta should be stated as optional"] need not be composed — this is the idea. The meaning is: "for one not desiring the rashness (sāhasa) that consists in abandoning the pluta rules," i.e., setting aside indifference toward the pluta teachings.

[On] aplutavat [like a non-pluta]: the Bhāṣya [says], "What is this 'upasthita'? The employment of a non-ārṣa (non-Vedic) 'iti' (anārṣam itikaraṇam)" — meaning a non-Vedic (avaidika) word "iti"; "pluta" is to be supplied [by ellipsis]. It results that, when a non-Vedic word "iti" follows, the pluta behaves like a non-pluta (aplutavat).

translator notes

textual The closing sentences of this block (from 'aplutavat' onward) concern the following sūtra, aplutavad upasthite (A 6.1.129; unit sk.98), yet they stand at the end of this block in the digital source; they are translated in place without relocation, per the non-emendation policy.

SK 98 · A 6.1.129अप्लुतवदतिदेशः

अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते ॥ ९८ ॥

aplutavadupasthite

aplutavad upasthite — When an upasthita [a non-Vedic 'iti'] follows, [a pluta vowel behaves] like a non-pluta (aplutavat).

Rule. When an upasthita follows, a pluta behaves like a non-pluta (aplutavat). The upasthita is the non-Vedic word iti — the iti that the padakāras, the makers of the padapāṭha, insert after a word at the word-separation. "Like a non-pluta" means: it undergoes yaṇ and the other sandhi operations.

Example.

suśloka3 iti → iti here is non-Vedic, inserted by the padakāra → the pluta a3 behaves like a → ād guṇaḥ: a + i gives e → suśloketi.

Applies when / blocked by. The Taittirīya recension reads the mantra with the pluta suśloka3; the padapāṭha adds iti, and there the sandhi form suśloketi is found in the Bhāṣya. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators add that padakāras who instead separate suśloka3 iti suśloka3 iti are not wrong, since the sandhi rules apply only in saṃhitā.

Watch out. Why vat, "like"? If the sūtra said simply "a non-pluta replaces it", the protraction itself would be removed. Then in agnī3 iti — the imitation of a vocative dual, whose ī is pragṛhya by SK 100 — the three-mātrā ī would no longer be heard. With vat, only the pluta's operation, its prakṛtibhāva by SK 90, is cancelled. The ī stays apart from iti by virtue of being pragṛhya, and it is still pronounced pluta. Scholars discuss the wording of Bhaṭṭoji's gloss here, which is transmitted in two readings.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

उपस्थितोऽनार्ष इति शब्दः तस्मिन्परे प्लुतोऽप्लुतवद्भवति । अप्लुतकार्यं यणादिकं करोतीत्यर्थः । सुश्लोकेति । वत्किम् । अप्लुत इत्युक्तेऽप्लुत एव विधीयेत प्लुतश्च निषिध्येत । तथा च प्रगृह्याश्रये प्रकृतिभावे प्लुतस्य श्रवणंन स्यात् । अग्नी3 इति ॥

"Upasthita" is the non-ārṣa (non-Vedic) word "iti"; when it follows, a pluta behaves like a non-pluta (aplutavat). The meaning is: it performs the operations proper to a non-pluta, such as yaṇ and the rest. [Example:] suśloketi. Why "vat" [like]? Were it said [simply] "apluta," only a non-pluta would be prescribed and the pluta would be prohibited; and so, in the prakṛtibhāva that depends on the pragṛhya [designation], the pluta would not be heard [pronounced]. [Example:] agnī3 iti.

Bālamanoramā

अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते - तदाह — उपस्थितोऽनार्ष इति । अप्सुतवद्भावस्य प्रयोजनमाह — प्लुतकार्यं प्रकृतिभावमिति ।अप्लुतकार्यं यणादिकं करोती॑ति पाठान्तरम् । सुश्लोकं३ इतीति । तैत्तिरीये 'सुश्लोक३' इति प्लुतान्तो मन्त्रः पठितः । पदकालेऽवग्रहे तस्मात्परत इतिशब्दं पदकाराः पठन्ति । तत्रसुश्लोक३ इती॑ति स्थितेऽप्लुतवद्भावेन प्रकृतिभावाऽभावे सत्याद्गुणे सुश्लोकेतीति भवति । अत्रेतिशब्दः पदकारप्रक्षिप्तत्वादवैदिकः । तदेव 'सुश्लोकेति' इत्युदाहरणं भाष्ये स्थितम् । पदकारास्तुसुश्लोक३ इति सुश्लोक३ इती॑त्येव अवगृह्णन्ति । तदपि संहिताया अविवक्षितत्वान्निर्वाह्रम् । संहितायामेव यणादिसन्धिविधानात् । वत्किमिति ।अप्लुत्तव॑दित्यत्र वद्ग्रहणस्य किं प्रयोजनमिति प्रश्नः । उत्तरमाह — अप्लुत इत्यादिना । वद्ग्रहणं विहायाऽप्लुत उपस्थित इत्युक्तेप्लुतस्य स्थानेऽप्लुत एव विधीयते । अतः प्लुत एव निवर्तेत । ततश्च अग्नी३ इतीत्यत्र सम्बोधनप्रथमाद्विवचनान्तस्यानुकरणे प्रगृह्र ईकारस्त्रिमात्रो न श्रूयते । वत्करणे तु प्लुतकार्यस्य प्रकृतिभावस्यैव निवृत्तिर्गम्यते न तु प्लुतस्यापीति नोक्तदोष इत्यर्थः ।

aplutavad upasthite — This he states with "upasthita is the non-ārṣa [iti]." He states the purpose of the aplutavadbhāva with "[it sets aside] the pluta's operation, [namely] prakṛtibhāva." "aplutakāryaṃ yaṇādikaṃ karoti" ["it performs the operation of a non-pluta, viz. yaṇ and the like"] is a variant reading (pāṭhāntara). On suśloka3 iti: in the Taittirīya [recension], the mantra ending in the pluta "suśloka3" is read; at the time of the pada[-pāṭha], at the word-separation (avagraha), the padakāras read the word "iti" after it. There, when "suśloka3 iti" stands, by the aplutavadbhāva, prakṛtibhāva being absent, guṇa (ād guṇaḥ) [applies] [a + i → e], and it becomes "suśloketi." Here the word "iti" is non-Vedic (avaidika), because it is inserted by the padakāra. This very example, "suśloketi," stands in the Bhāṣya. But the padakāras separate it as "suśloka3 iti suśloka3 iti" [retaining the pluta]; that too is manageable, since the saṃhitā [continuous form] is not intended there, because yaṇ and the other sandhi operations are prescribed only in the saṃhitā.

On "why vat": the question is, what is the purpose of the mention of "vat" in "aplutavat"? He gives the answer with "apluta," etc.: omitting the mention of "vat," were it said "apluta upasthite," then in place of the pluta only a non-pluta would be prescribed; hence the pluta itself would be removed; and so, in agnī3 iti — in the imitation (anukaraṇa) of a form ending in the nominative dual of address (sambodhana-prathamā-dvivacana) — the pragṛhya ī of three morae (trimātra) would not be heard. But with the making of "vat," [only] the cessation of the pluta's operation (prakṛtibhāva) is understood, not the cessation of the pluta itself; hence the stated fault does not [arise] — that is the meaning.

translator notes

textual The Bālamanoramā reports two readings of the Kaumudī phrase: the printed k1 has 'aplutakāryaṃ yaṇādikam...', which the Bālamanoramā gives as the variant (pāṭhāntara), naming the other reading 'plutakāryaṃ prakṛtibhāvam' first. Digitization garbles aplutavadbhāva as apsutavadbhāva; the translation follows the evident reading.

SK 99 · A 6.1.130V

ई३ चाक्रवर्मणस्य ॥ ९९ ॥

ī3 cākravarmaṇasya

ī3 cākravarmaṇasya — According to Cākravarmaṇa, a pluta ī (ī3), when a vowel (ac) follows, optionally behaves as though it were non-pluta (apluta-vat).

Rule. In Cākravarmaṇa's view, a pluta ī3 before any vowel behaves like a non-pluta. Because a teacher is named, the rule is optional. aplutavat is carried forward from SK 98, and aci, "when a vowel follows", from iko yaṇ aci; upasthite is not carried forward, so the following word need not be iti.

Example.

cinuhī3 iti → ī3 before a vowel → Cākravarmaṇa: behaves like ī → yaṇ → cinuhīti; or the pluta keeps its own form → cinuhī3 iti.

cinuhī3 idam → the same option before a vowel other than iti → cinu hīdam or cinuhī3 idam.

Applies when / blocked by. The option holds in both settings. Before iti, SK 98 would have made the non-pluta behaviour obligatory; before any other vowel, SK 98 would not have applied at all. This sūtra, framed for both, makes both optional. Where does the pluta of hī come from? cinu hi ("gather, indeed") is the reply to a question, and the hi in a reply to a question is optionally pluta by a rule outside this chapter (A 8.2.93); idam begins a separate sentence, so hi is sentence-final.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

ई3 प्लुतोऽचि परेऽप्लुतवद्वा स्यात् । चिनुही3 इति । चिनुहीति । चिनुही3 इदम् । चिनु हीदम् । उभयत्रविभाषेयम् ॥

A pluta ī, when a vowel (ac) follows, optionally behaves as though non-pluta (apluta-vat). cinuhī3 iti / cinuhīti. cinuhī3 idam / cinu hīdam. This option (vibhāṣā) applies in both cases.

Bālamanoramā

ई३ चाक्रवर्मणस्य - ई३चाक्र । ई३ इति प्लुतस्य लुप्तप्रथमाविभक्तिको निर्देशः । उपस्थित #इत्यस्वरितत्वान्निवृत्तम् ।अप्लुतव॑दित्यनुवर्तते ।इको यणची॑त्यतोऽचीत्यनुवर्तते । चाक्रवर्मणमुनेर्मते ईकारोऽचि परेऽप्लुतवद्भवति, नत्वन्यमत इत्यर्थः । तदाह-प्लुतोऽचीत्यादि । चिनु हि३ इदमिति ।किं मया कर्तव्य॑मिति पृष्टस्यैदं प्रतिवचनम् ।चिन्वि॑ति लोडन्तम् ।उतश्च प्रत्यया॑दिति हेर्लुक् ।हीति त्वव्ययम् ।विभाषा पृष्टप्रतिवचने हेः॑ इति तस्य प्लुतः । चिन्वित्यतः प्राग्देवदत्ते॑त्यध्याहार्यम् ।इद॑मिति तु वाक्यान्तरस्थं, नतु चिन्वित्येतेनैकवाक्यतामापन्नम् । अन्यथावाक्यस्य टे॑रित्यधिकाराद्धिशब्दे इकारस्य प्लुतो न स्यात् । उभयत्रेति । इतिशब्दे परतो नित्यतया प्राप्ते, तदन्यत्राऽप्राप्ते चारम्भादुभयत्र विभाषेयमित्यर्थः । विभाषाशब्दस्त्वव्ययमिति न ब्रामतिव्यं,न वेति विभाषाया॑मिति भाष्यप्रयोगात् । विभाष्यते विकल्प्यत इति विभाषा । 'गुरोश्च हल' इत्यप्रत्ययः । टाप् ।

ī3 cākravarmaṇasya — ī3 cākra. "ī3" is a mention of [the pluta ī] with its nominative (first-case) ending elided (lupta-prathamā-vibhakti). "upasthita" [from the previous sūtra] has ceased (nivṛtta), because it is not svarita [and so does not continue by anuvṛtti]. "apluta-vat" is carried forward (anuvṛtti) [from *aplutavad upasthite*, A 6.1.129]. From *iko yaṇ aci* [A 6.1.77] "aci" is carried forward. In the view of the sage Cākravarmaṇa, ī, when a vowel follows, behaves as non-pluta — but not in another's view — this is the meaning. He states this with "a pluta [ī], when a vowel [follows]" etc.

"cinu hi3 idam": this is the reply of one who has been asked "what should I do?" "cinu" ends in a loṬ [imperative]; by *utaś ca pratyayād [asaṃyogapūrvāt]* [A 6.4.106] the hi [ending] is elided (luk); but "hi" [here] is an indeclinable (avyaya). Its pluta comes by *vibhāṣā pṛṣṭaprativacane heḥ* [A 8.2.93, whereby the *hi* in the answer to a question is optionally pluta]. Before "cinu" the [word] "devadatta" [O Devadatta] is to be supplied. But "idam" belongs to a separate sentence; it does not form a single sentence with "cinu." Otherwise, by the adhikāra *vākyasya ṭeḥ* [A 8.2.82], the pluta of the i in the word "hi" would not occur [since by that adhikāra pluta falls only on the final of a sentence — so *hi* must be sentence-final].

"ubhayatra" (in both cases): before the word iti, [the non-pluta treatment] would apply obligatorily (nitya); before anything other than iti it would not apply at all; and since [the sūtra] is undertaken [to cover] both, this option applies in both cases — this is the meaning. One must not think the word "vibhāṣā" is an indeclinable, because of the Bhāṣya's usage *na veti vibhāṣāyām* [treating vibhāṣā as a regular noun]. "vibhāṣā" [is derived as] "that by which optioning is done" (vibhāṣyate = vikalpyate): the suffix a by *guroś ca halaḥ* [A 3.3.103], and ṭāp [the feminine ā].

translator notes

textual OCR artifacts are present (e.g. 'ब्रामतिव्यं' for bhramitavyam, 'भोयज्युत'-type garbling elsewhere in the chapter). The intended readings are followed; nothing is silently emended in the source layer.

SK 100 · A 1.1.11प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

ईदूदेद्द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यम् ॥ १०० ॥

īdūdeddvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam

īdūdeddvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam — A dvivacana (dual form) ending in ī, ū, or e receives the designation pragṛhya.

Rule. A dual form (dvivacana) ending in ī, ū or e is named pragṛhya. The compound īdūdet qualifies dvivacana, so the tadanta reading applies: "ending in ī/ū/e", not "being ī/ū/e".

Example.

harī + etau → harī is a dual ending in ī → pragṛhya → SK 90 blocks yaṇ → harī etau.

viṣṇū + imau → a dual ending in ū → pragṛhya → no yaṇ → viṣṇū imau.

gaṅge + amū → a dual ending in e → pragṛhya → no ay substitution → gaṅge amū.

pacete + imau → the verb's dual ending āte has become ete, which ends in e → pragṛhya → pacete imau.

Applies when / blocked by. The last example shows why the tadanta reading matters. The dual ending of pacete is not itself the vowel e; it merely ends in e. Read as "a dual that is e", the rule would miss it. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators note that the word dvivacana itself does not take the tadanta reading, because in a saṃjñā rule the mention of an affix does not extend to what ends in it.

Watch out. In the epic phrase maṇīvoṣṭrasya one might think maṇī + iva and ask why the ī did not stay apart as a pragṛhya. Bhaṭṭoji answers that the word here is the particle va (or vā), meaning "like", so the form is maṇī + va and no vowel sandhi is in question at all.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

ईदूदेदन्तं द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यसंज्ञं स्यात् । हरी एतौ । विष्णू इमौ । गङ्गे अमू । पचेते इमौ । मणीवोष्ट्रस्येति तु इवार्थे वशब्दो वाशब्दो वा बोध्यः ॥

A dvivacana ending in ī, ū, or e is termed pragṛhya. [Examples:] harī etau; viṣṇū imau; gaṅge amū; pacete imau. But in "maṇīvoṣṭrasya," the word "va" or "vā," in the sense of "like (iva)," should be understood [so that maṇī there is not a dual pragṛhya].

Bālamanoramā

ईदूदेद्द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यम् - ईदूदेद्द्विचनम् । ईच्च ऊच्च एच्चेति समाहारद्वन्द्वः । ईदूदेदिति द्विवचनविशेषणत्वात्तदन्तविधिः ।द्विवचन॑मित्यनेन तु प्रत्ययत्वे ।ञपि न तदन्तं गृह्रते,संज्ञाविधौ प्रत्ययग्रहणे तदन्तग्रहणं नास्ती॑ति तन्निषेधात् । तदाह — ईदूदेदन्तमित्यादिना । हरी एताविति । अत्र ईकारस्य परादिवत्त्वाश्रयणाद्द्विवचनत्वम् । प्रगृह्रत्वे सति 'प्लुतप्रगृह्रा' इति प्रकृतिभावान्न यण् । विष्णू इमावित्यत्राप्येवम् । गङ्गे अमू इत्यत्र त्वयादेशो न भवति ।ईदूदेदन्त॑मिति तदन्तविधेः प्रयोजनं दर्शयितुमाह-पचेते इमाविति । तदन्तविध्यबावे ईदूदेदात्मकं द्विवचनं प्रगृह्रमिति लभ्येत । एवं सति 'पचेते' इत्यत्रइते इति द्विवचनस्य एद्रूपत्वाऽभावात्प्रगृह्रत्वं न स्यादिति भावः ।ईदूदेदन्तं यद्द्विचनान्त॑मिति व्याख्याने तु कुमार्योरगारं कुमार्यगारमित्यत्रातिप्रसङ्गः स्यात् ।ईदूदेदन्तं द्विवचन॑मिति व्याख्याने तु नातिप्रसङ्गः, ओसो द्विवचनस्य ईदूदेदन्तत्वाऽभावात् । ननुमणीवोष्ट्रस्य सम्बेते प्रियौ वत्सतरौ ममे॑ति भारतश्लोकेमणी इवे॑ति ईकारस्य प्रगृह्रत्वे सति प्रकृतिभावे सवर्णदीर्घो न स्यादित्यत आह-मणीवोष्ट्रस्येति ।वं प्रचेतसि जानीयादिवार्थे च तदव्यय॑मिति मेदिनी ।व वा यथा तथैवैवं साम्ये॑इत्यमरः ।

īdūdeddvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam — "ī and ū and e" — a samāhāra-dvandva [compound]. Since "īdūdet" qualifies "dvivacana," the tadanta-vidhi [applies — "that which ends in ī/ū/e"]. But by [the word] "dvivacana," even though it is [the name of] an affix (pratyaya), that which ends in it is not taken [no tadanta], because of the prohibition [by the paribhāṣā] (paribhāṣā) "in a saṃjñā-rule, when an affix is mentioned, that which ends in the affix is not comprehended (saṃjñāvidhau pratyayagrahaṇe tadantagrahaṇaṃ nāsti)." This he states with "ending in ī, ū, e," etc.

On harī etau: here the ī has dvivacana-status by resorting to its being reckoned as [the initial constituent of] the following [item] (parādivadbhāva). Being pragṛhya, by "plutapragṛhyā [aci nityam]" there is prakṛtibhāva, so no yaṇ [ī does not become y]. In viṣṇū imau likewise. But in gaṅge amū, the ay-substitution does not occur [e being pragṛhya]. To show the purpose of the tadanta-vidhi in "ending in ī/ū/e," he says pacete imau: in the absence of the tadanta-vidhi, one would get "a dvivacana that is [itself] ī/ū/e is pragṛhya"; in that case, in "pacete," since the dvivacana "(ā)te" is not itself of the form "e" [but merely ends in e], pragṛhya-status would not obtain — this is the idea. On the interpretation "that which ends in a dvivacana ending in ī/ū/e," however, there would be over-application (atiprasaṅga) in "kumāryor agāram → kumāryagāram"; whereas on the interpretation "a dvivacana ending in ī/ū/e" there is no over-application, since the dvivacana "os" [genitive/locative dual] does not end in ī/ū/e.

Objection: in the Bhārata verse "maṇīvoṣṭrasya sambe(?)te priyau vatsatarau mama," in "maṇī iva," if the ī has pragṛhya-status, then with prakṛtibhāva the savarṇadīrgha would not occur. Regarding this he says maṇīvoṣṭrasya: "va [is used] in [the sense of] 'in Pracetas' and also in the sense of 'like (iva)'; that [va] is indeclinable (avyaya)" — thus the Medinī [kośa]; "va, vā, yathā, tathā, eva, evaṃ [are used] in the sense of similarity (sāmya)" — thus the Amara[-kośa]. [Hence maṇīva is maṇī + the particle va, not a dual pragṛhya, and the savarṇadīrgha issue does not arise.]

translator notes

textual The digital source systematically corrupts pragṛhya as pragṛhra (ह्र for ह्य) and garbles dvivacana/os forms and the Bhārata half-verse; the translation follows the evident readings without emending. The verse (maṇīvoṣṭrasya...) is cited as from the Bhārata but not further identified.

SK 101 · A 1.1.12प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

अदसो मात् ॥ १०१ ॥

adaso māt

adaso māt — 1.1.12. The ī and ū of adas that follow its m are pragṛhya (exempt from vowel-sandhi).

Rule. The ī and ū of the pronoun adas ("that") that follow its m are pragṛhya. īd-ūt and pragṛhyam are carried forward from SK 100; et and dvivacana are not, because an e after the m of adas never occurs, and the ī after that m is a plural.

Example.

amī + īśāḥ → amī is the nominative plural of adas: ade becomes amī by two rules of the Tripādī (A 8.2.81, e → ī; A 8.2.80, d → m) → the ī follows the m → pragṛhya → no savarṇadīrgha → amī īśāḥ ("those lords").

rāmakṛṣṇāv amū + āsāte → amū is the nominative dual: adau becomes amū by A 8.2.80 → the ū follows the m → pragṛhya → rāmakṛṣṇāv amū āsāte ("those two, Rāma and Kṛṣṇa, sit").

Applies when / blocked by. SK 100 could not reach either form. amī is a plural, not a dual. amū is a dual, but its ū and m arise in the Tripādī, which is asiddha for SK 100 (chapter 1, SK 12); to SK 100 the word is still adau, which ends in au. This sūtra is different: its own word māt, "after the m", presupposes that the m has been made, so for it the Tripādī changes count. Why māt? Consider amuke 'tra, with the infix aka inside the pronoun: here the e does not follow the m, and it is not pragṛhya. Without māt, the e of SK 100 would have been carried forward along with ī and ū, and the e of amuke would wrongly have been named.

Watch out. Bhaṭṭoji writes rāmakṛṣṇāv amū to make clear that the masculine is meant. The feminine and neuter duals are also amū, but there a dual e is present before the Tripādī changes, and SK 100 already names them.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अस्मात्परावीदूतौ प्रगृह्यौ स्तः । अमी ईशाः । रामकृष्णावमू आसाते । मात् किम् । अमुकेऽत्र । असति माद्ग्रहणे एकारोऽप्यनुवर्तेत ॥

The ī and ū that follow this [m of adas] are pragṛhya (i.e. not subject to sandhi). [Examples:] amī īśāḥ; rāmakṛṣṇāv amū āsāte. — Why 'māt' (after the m)? [Consider] amuke 'tra: were 'māt' not mentioned, the e [from the previous sūtra] would also be carried forward [and the e of amuke would wrongly become pragṛhya].

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 34–35

—अदसो मादिति । इह एकारो नानुवर्तते, असंभवादित्यभिप्रेत्याह—ईदूताविति । अदसः किम् । शम्यत्र, वाम्यत्र ॥ ननुकारानुवृत्तिर्यर्था ल्लियौ फले वा अमू आसाते इत्यत्र पूर्वेणैव सिद्धेः मुलस्यासि-द्धत्वेऽप्येकारान्तत्वादत आह—रामकृष्णाविति । पुंसि पूर्वेण न सिद्ध्यालौकारान्तत्वादिति भावः ॥ ‘अदसो मात्’ इति सूत्रं प्रति मूलमीलं च नासिद्धम् । आरम्भसामर्थ्यात् ॥—अमुकेऽत्रेति । ल्लिङ्गद्विवचनस्य तु पूर्वसूत्रेण प्रगृह्यत्वे प्रकृतिभाव एव । अमुकेऽत्र ॥—एकारोऽप्यनुवर्तेतेति । तथाच एकारानुवृत्तितात्पर्यग्रहफलकं माह्रहणमिति भावः

Bālamanoramā

अदसो मात् - अदसो मात् । 'अदस' इत्यवयवषष्ठी । अदश्शब्दावयवान्मकारादित्यर्थः ।ईदू॑दितिप्रगृह्र॑मिति चानुवर्तते ।मा॑दिति दिग्योगे पञ्चमी । परसभ्दोऽध्याहार्यः । तदाह — अस्मात्पराविति । अदश्शब्दावयवमकारात्परावित्यर्थः ।ए॑दिति नानुवर्तते, अदश्शब्दे मकारात्परस्यैकारस्याऽसंभवात् ।द्विवचन॑मित्यपि नानुवर्तते, अदश्शब्दे मकारात्परस्य ईकारस्य 'अमी' इति बहुवचनत्वात्, ऊकारस्य च मकारात्परस्य तत्र द्विवचनान्तेष्वेव सत्त्वेन व्यावर्त्त्याऽभावात् । अमी ईशा इति । अदश्शब्दाज्जसि त्यदाद्यत्वं पररूपत्वं । जसश्शी । आद्गुणः । 'अदे' इति स्थिते एकारस्यएत ई॑दिति ईत्त्वं, दस्य च मत्त्वम् । तदेवम्-॒अमी॑#इति रूपम् । अत्र ईकारस्य द्विवचनत्वा.ञभावात्पूर्वसूत्रेण प्रगृह्रसंज्ञा न प्राप्तेत्यनेन सा विधीयते । रामकृष्णावमू इति । पुंलिङ्गाददश्शब्दात्प्रथमाद्विवचने औङि, त्यदाद्यत्वं, पररूपत्वं । वृद्धिरेचि । अदौ इति स्थिते, अदसोऽसेरित्यौकारस्य ऊत्वं, दस्य मत्वम् । अमू इति रूपम् । यद्यप्ययमूकारो द्विवचनं भवति, तथापि पूर्वसूत्रेण प्रगृह्रत्वे कर्तव्ये उत्वमत्वयोरसिद्धतया दकारादौकारस्यैव शास्त्रदृष्टआ सत्त्वात्पूर्वस#ऊत्रेण तस्य प्रगृह्रत्वं न प्राप्तमित्यनेन विधीयते ।अदसो मा॑दिति सूत्रं प्रति तु उत्वमत्वे नासिद्धे, आरम्भसामर्थ्यात् । पूर्वसूत्रस्य तु तत्र न सामर्थ्यं, हरी एतौ, विष्णू इमावित्यादौ चरितार्थत्वात् ।स्त्रियौ फले वा अमू आसाते॑ इति स्त्रीलिङ्गो नपुंसकलिङ्गश्च अदश्शब्दो नात्रोदाहरणम् । तथाहि स्त्रीलिङ्गददश्शब्दादौङि, त्यदाद्यत्वे, पररूपत्वे, टापि, 'ओङ आप' इति शीभावे, आद्गुणे, उत्वमत्वयोरमू इत्येव रूपम् । तथा नपुंसलिङ्गात्तस्मादौङि, त्यदाद्यत्वे, पररूपत्वे, नपुंसकाच्चेति शीभावे, आद्गुणे, उत्वमत्वयोरमू #इत्येव रूपम् । अत्र पूर्वसूत्रेणैव प्रगृह्रत्वं सिद्धम् । उत्वमत्वयोरसिद्धत्वेऽप्येकारस्य द्विवचनस्य सत्त्वात् । अतः पुंलिङ्ग एव अदश्शब्दोऽत्रोदाहरणमिति प्रदर्शयितुं 'रामकृष्णा' वित्युक्तम् । मात्किमिति । 'अदस' इत्येव सूत्रमस्तु, माद्ग्रहणस्य किं प्रयोजनमिति प्रश्नः । अमुकेत्रेतिअव्ययसर्वनाम्नामकच् प्राक्टेः॑ #इत्यकचि अदकश्शब्दाज्जसि, त्यदाद्यत्वं, पररूपत्वम्, जसश्शी, आद्गुणः उत्वमत्वे । 'अमुके' इति रूपम् । अत्र एकारस्य प्रगृह्रत्वनिवृत्त्यर्थं माद्ग्रहणम् । कृते च तस्मिन्नेकारस्य म#आत्परत्वाऽभावान्न प्रगृह्रत्वमिति भावः । नन्वेवमपि माद्ग्रहणं व्यर्थम्, एद्ग्रहणमननुवर्त्त्य ईदूतोरेवाऽत्र प्रगृह्रत्वविधानाब्युपगमेन 'अमुके' इत्यत्र प्रगृह्रत्वप्रसक्तेरेवाऽभावादित्यत आह — असतीति ।अदसो मा॑दित्यत्र ईदूदेतामेकसमासपदोपात्तानां मध्ये ईदूतोद्र्वयोरनुवृत्तौ एतोऽप्यनुवृत्तिप्रसक्तौ माद्ग्रहणादेतोऽनुवृत्तिः प्रतिबद्धा । माद्ग्रहणाऽभावे तु बाधकाऽभावादेतोऽप्यनुवृत्तिः स्यात् । ततश्च 'अमुके' इत्यत्रापि एकारस्य प्रगृह्रत्वप्रसक्तौ तन्निवृत्त्यर्थं माद्ग्रहणम् । कृते तु तस्मिन्नेतोऽनुवृत्तिप्रतिबन्धादमुके इत्यत्र न प्रगृह्रत्वम् । तथाच एकाराननुवृत्तिफलसकं माद्ग्रहणमिति भावः ।

adaso māt — 'adasaḥ' is an avayava-ṣaṣṭhī (partitive genitive): the meaning is 'from the m that is a component of the word adas (adaḥ-śabda-avayava).' 'īd-ūt' [the ī and ū] and 'pragṛhyam' are carried forward (anuvṛtti) [from īdūded dvivacanaṃ pragṛhyam, A 1.1.11]. 'māt' is an ablative in a directional sense (dig-yoga); the word 'para' (following) is to be supplied. So he says 'that follow this' (asmāt parau) — meaning 'the two [ī, ū] that follow the m which is a component of adas.' The e (et) is NOT carried forward, because in the word adas an e following the m is impossible. 'dvivacana' (the restriction to the dual) is also not carried forward: because the ī after the m in adas — as in amī — is a plural (bahuvacana), and because the ū after the m, occurring there only in dual-ending forms, leaves nothing for the dual-restriction to exclude (vyāvartya-abhāva).

[On] amī īśāḥ: from adas, with jas [nom. pl.], tyadādyatva (A 7.2.102, adas → ada-) and pararūpa; then jasaḥ śī (A 7.1.17), and ād guṇaḥ (A 6.1.87). When 'ade' stands, by eta īd (A 8.2.81) the e becomes ī (īttva), and by adaso 'ser… (A 8.2.80) the d becomes m (mattva). Thus the form is amī. Here, because the ī is not a dual (dvivacana-abhāva), the pragṛhya designation is not obtained by the previous sūtra [A 1.1.11, which requires a dual]; so it is prescribed by this [sūtra].

[On] rāmakṛṣṇāv amū: from the masculine word adas, in the nominative dual with auṄ, [there apply] tyadādyatva, pararūpa, and vṛddhir eci (A 6.1.88). When 'adau' stands, by adaso 'seḥ (A 8.2.80) the au becomes ū (ūtva) and the d becomes m (matva); the form is amū. Although this ū is a dual, nevertheless, when pragṛhya-hood is to be effected by the previous sūtra, since the ūtva and matva are asiddha (regarded as not yet done), in the śāstric view (śāstra-dṛṣṭyā) only the au after the d is present; hence its pragṛhya-hood is not obtained by the previous sūtra, and so it is prescribed by this one. With respect to the sūtra adaso māt itself, however, the ūtva and matva are NOT asiddha, by the force of this sūtra's very framing (ārambha-sāmarthya) [since 'māt' presupposes that matva has occurred]. The previous sūtra [A 1.1.11], on the other hand, has no such force here, because it is already fully occupied (caritārtha) in cases like harī etau, viṣṇū imau.

The feminine and neuter word adas — as in 'striyau phale vā amū āsāte' — is not the example here. To explain: from the feminine adas, with auṄ, tyadādyatva, pararūpa, ṬāP, then the śī-substitution by oṅ āp, ād guṇa, and ūtva-matva, the form is likewise amū; and from the neuter, with auṄ, tyadādyatva, pararūpa, the śī-substitution by napuṃsakāc ca (A 7.1.19), ād guṇa, and ūtva-matva, the form is again amū. Here pragṛhya-hood is established by the previous sūtra itself, because even though ūtva and matva are asiddha, a dual e is present. Therefore, to show that only the masculine adas is the example here, [Bhaṭṭoji] said 'rāmakṛṣṇau' [i.e. a masculine context].

[On] 'māt kim' (why māt?): the question is — let the sūtra be just 'adasaḥ'; what is the purpose of mentioning 'māt'? [Answered by] amuke 'tra: by avyaya-sarvanāmnām akac prāk ṭeḥ (A 5.3.71), with the akaC infix, from the word 'adaka(s)', with jas, [there apply] tyadādyatva, pararūpa, jasaḥ śī, ād guṇaḥ, and ūtva-matva; the form is amuke. Here the mention of 'māt' [serves] to prevent the pragṛhya-hood of the e; for once 'māt' is stated, since the e does not follow the m (māt-paratva-abhāva), it is not pragṛhya. This is the point.

Objection (nanu): Even so, the mention of 'māt' is pointless — for if we do not carry forward 'et' (the e) [from A 1.1.11] and admit that here pragṛhya-hood is prescribed only for ī and ū, then in amuke there is no occasion for pragṛhya-hood at all. — To this [Bhaṭṭoji] says 'asati' (were [māt] not [mentioned]): in adaso māt, among ī, ū, e — which are taken up in a single compound word (īdūdet in A 1.1.11) — when the two, ī and ū, are carried forward, the e too would tend to be carried forward; but by the mention of 'māt' the anuvṛtti of the e is blocked (pratibaddha). Were 'māt' not mentioned, then, there being no blocker (bādhaka), the e too would be carried forward; and then, since in amuke too the pragṛhya-hood of the e would arise, the mention of 'māt' [serves] to prevent it. But once 'māt' is stated, because the anuvṛtti of the e is blocked, there is no pragṛhya-hood in amuke. And so the mention of 'māt' has as its fruit the non-anuvṛtti of the e. This is the point.

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 35 १ वाक्येति—वाक्यशब्देन वाक्यार्थगतमन्यथालमुच्यते, अन्यथात्वं चानमिमतत्वमेव ।

translator notes

textual The digital source is corrupt in several places, followed here per the evidently intended reading (none emended in the source layer): 'परसभ्दो' for para-śabdo; 'व्यावर्त्त्याऽभावात्' for vyāvartya-abhāvāt; 'शास्त्रदृष्टआ' for śāstra-dṛṣṭyā; 'पूर्वस#ऊत्रेण' for pūrva-sūtreṇa; 'अमुकेत्रेति' for amuke 'tra iti; 'फलसकं' for phalakaṃ; stray '#' marks at 'अमी॑#', 'अमू #इत्येव', 'म#आत्परत्व'. The illustrative phrase 'striyau phale vā amū āsāte' is cited by the commentary as attesting the feminine/neuter form.
translator For the derivations, the intermediate forms and the rule numbers (eta īd A 8.2.81; adaso 'ser dādu do maḥ A 8.2.80; jasaḥ śī A 7.1.17; avyaya-sarvanāmnām akac prāk ṭeḥ A 5.3.71) follow the bare rule-names the commentary supplies; steps are not independently constructed beyond what the text states. The oṅ āp śī-substitution for the feminine is cited by the commentary only by its pratīka and left unnumbered here.

SK 102 · A 1.1.13प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

शे ॥ १०२ ॥

śe

śe (1.1.13) — [A word-form ending in the affix] śe is pragṛhya.

Rule. A form ending in the affix śe is pragṛhya. The affix śe is met in Vedic forms such as asme, "to us".

Example.

asme + indrābṛhaspatī → asme ends in śe → pragṛhya → no ay substitution → asme indrābṛhaspatī ("Indra and Bṛhaspati, to us …").

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अयं प्रगृह्यः स्यात् । अस्मे इन्द्राबृहस्पती ॥

This [a form ending in the affix śe] is pragṛhya. [Example:] asme indrābṛhaspatī.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 35

—शे इति । छान्दसमपीदं संदर्भशुद्ध्यर्थमुक्तमित्याहुः ॥—अस्मे इति । असम्भ्यमित्यर्थः, ‘सुपां सुङ्ग्’ इति भ्यसः शे आदेशः । ‘शेषे लोपः’

SK 103 · A 1.1.14प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

निपात एकाजनाङ् ॥ १०३ ॥

nipāta ekājanāṅ

nipāta ekāj anāṅ (1.1.14) — A particle (nipāta) consisting of a single vowel (ekāc), with the exception of āṅ (anāṅ), is [designated] pragṛhya.

Rule. A particle (nipāta) consisting of a single vowel (ekāc), except āṅ, is pragṛhya. āṅ is the ā that carries the marker ṅ; the marker is never heard, so the rule tells you how to know it by sense.

Example.

i + indraḥ → i, a particle of astonishment, is a single vowel → pragṛhya → no savarṇadīrgha → i indraḥ.

u + umeśaḥ → u, a particle of deliberation → pragṛhya → u umeśaḥ.

ā + evaṃ nu manyase → ā of a resumed sentence ("Ah, so now you think this"), not ṅit → pragṛhya → ā evaṃ nu manyase; likewise ā evaṃ kila tat (ā of recollection).

ā + uṣṇam → ā in the sense "a little" is āṅ, marked ṅ → not pragṛhya → ād guṇaḥ → oṣṇam ("slightly hot").

Applies when / blocked by. Bhaṭṭoji quotes the verse that sorts the two *ā*s: the ā meaning "a little", the ā joined to an action, and the ā of limit or of inclusion are ṅit; the ā that changes the drift of a sentence already begun, and the ā of recollection, are not ṅit (aṅit). Only the latter two are pragṛhya.

Watch out. ekāc must be read as "one, and a vowel" — the particle is a single vowel. If it were read "having one vowel", a particle like pra would qualify, and pra + idam could not become predam.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

एकोऽज्निपात आङ्वर्जः प्रगृह्यः स्यात् । इ विस्मये । इ इन्द्रः । उ वितर्के । उ उमेशः । अनाङित्युक्तेरङिदाकारः प्रगृह्य एव । आ एवं नु मन्यसे । आ एवं किल तत् । ङित्तु न प्रगृह्यः । ईषदुष्णम् ओष्णम् ॥ ईषदर्थे क्रियायोगे मर्यादाऽभिविधौ च यः । एतमातं ङितं विद्याद्वाक्यस्मरणयोरङित् ॥

A nipāta [consisting of] a single vowel (ekāc), excluding āṅ, is pragṛhya. [Examples:] "i" [expressing] astonishment (vismaya) — "i indraḥ"; "u" [expressing] deliberation (vitarka) — "u umeśaḥ" [in each, the two vowels do not combine]. Since [the rule] says anāṅ (excluding āṅ), an ā that is aṅit (not marked with the anubandha ṅ) is indeed pragṛhya: ā evaṃ nu manyase ("Ah, so you think thus"), ā evaṃ kila tat ("Ah, so indeed it is"). But the ṅit [ā, i.e. āṅ] is not pragṛhya: īṣaduṣṇam → oṣṇam ("slightly hot"). — [Verse:] "The ā that [is used] in the sense of 'a little' (īṣad), in conjunction with an action (kriyāyoga), and in [the senses of] limit (maryādā) and inclusion (abhividhi) — know that to be ṅit; in [the senses of] a [resumed] sentence (vākya) and recollection (smaraṇa), it is aṅit."

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 35–36

—निपात एकाजिति । निपातः किम् । अततेऽङ्कः । अः । हे अ आगच्छ । अत्र प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा मा भूत् । एकप्रहणाभावे ‘येन विधिः—’ इति सूत्रात्तदन्तलामे प्रेदमित्यत्र स्यादत उक्तम् ‘एक—’ इति । ‘एकाज्’ इति तु न वहुत्रीहिः उक्तातिप्रसङ्गतादवत्थ्यात् । अतः ‘पूर्व मलेक—’ इति कर्मधारय एव ॥ ननु ‘निपातोऽज-नाङ्—’ इत्युक्ते हलन्तस्य सत्यपि प्रगृह्यत्वे प्रयोजनाभावादजन्ते प्राप्ते अज्यहणसामर्थ्याद् जूपस्यैव निपातस्य प्रगृह्यत्वे सिद्धेः किमेकप्रहणेन । न च पुरोऽस्तीत्यादौ हलन्तस्य संज्ञायां सत्यां प्रकृतिभावात् ‘अतो रोः—’ इति रोरुत्वे न स्यादतोऽज्य-हणसामर्थ्यमुपक्षीणमित्येकप्रहणमावश्यकमिति वाच्यम् । प्रगृह्यसंज्ञां प्रति रुत्वस्यासिद्धतया रेफान्तस्यैतस्य प्रगृह्यसंज्ञाभा-वेन दोषाप्रसक्तेः । न च सान्तस्य कृता प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा एकदेशविकृतन्यायेन रेफान्तस्यापि स्यादेवेति प्रकृतिभावादुलाभा-वप्रसङ्गस्तदवस्थ इति वाच्यम् । प्रगृह्यसंज्ञां प्रतीव प्रकृतिभावं प्रत्यपि रुत्वस्यासिद्धत्वात् प्रकृतिभावाप्रवृत्तेः । सकारा-न्तस्य तु न किञ्चिदपि सिद्धकाण्डस्थं प्रयोजनं प्राप्नोति यत्कृतिभावेन व्यावल्येत । न चाज्यहणसामर्थ्यादजन्तस्यैव प्र-पराऽपेत्यादिनिपातस्य प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा स्यान्न लज्जूपनिपातस्येति वैपरीत्यशङ्कानिवारणार्थमेकप्रहणमिति वाच्यम् । अनाङ्गह-णस्य वैयर्थ्यापत्तेः, ‘व्याहरति मृगः’ इत्यादिनिर्देशविरोधाच्चोक्तशङ्काया अप्रवृत्तेः । किञ्च ‘निपातोऽजनाङ्’ इत्युक्तेऽप्यना-ङिति प्रतिषेधसामर्थ्यान्निपातस्य विशेषणत्वाभ्युपगमे तदन्तविध्यप्रवृत्त्या निपातरूपो योऽच् स प्रगृह्य इत्यर्थलाभादजूपस्यैव निपातस्य प्रगृह्यत्वं सिद्धमिति नास्त्येव प्रयोजनमेकप्रहणस्य । नन्वेवमपि समुदायनिवृत्त्यर्थमेकप्रहणमावश्यकमेव । अ-न्यथा अ इ उ अपेहीत्यत्रैकाज्द्विवचनन्यायेन समुदायस्यैव संज्ञा स्यान्नावयवानामिति चरमस्यैव प्रकृतिभावः स्यान्न तु पूर्वयोरिति चेन्न । अजित्येकत्वस्य विवक्ष्यैव समुदायनिराससंभवात्समुदायसंज्ञया अवयवानामननुग्रहेणैकाज्द्विवचन-न्यायस्याप्यप्रवृत्तेः । एकस्मिन्निपाते संज्ञाविधानसंभवेन निपातसमुदायस्य निपातप्रहणेनाप्रहणाच्च । अत्राहुर्भाष्य-काराः ‘अच्छमुदायप्रहणशङ्कानिरासार्थमेकप्रहणं कुर्वन् ज्ञापयति वर्णप्रहणेषु व्यक्तिसंख्या न विवक्ष्यते किंतु जातिरेव निर्दिश्यते’ इति । तेन ‘हलन्ताच्च’ इति सनः कित्वात् ‘दम्भ इच्च’ इतीत्वे धिप्सतीत्यादि सिद्धम् । हलन्तस्य व्यक्तिपरत्वे तु योऽत्रेकः समीपो हल् नकारो न ततः परः सन्, यस्माच्च परः सन् भकारान्नासाविकः समीप इति कित्वं न स्यात्, ततश्च नलोपो न स्यात् । वस्तुतस्तु अपृक्तसंज्ञायामेकप्रहणमुक्तार्थज्ञापकमित्याश्रित्य प्रकृतसूत्रे एकाज्यहणं त्यक्तुं शक्यम् । अत-एव मनोरमायामनाङिति पर्युदासादेवाजूपनिपाते लब्धे निपातप्रहणमुत्तरार्थं स्पष्टप्रतिपत्त्यर्थमिहैव कृतमिति निपातप्रह-णस्यैव प्रयोजनमुक्तं न त्वेकाज्यहणस्य ॥ अत्र नव्याः । यदुक्तं मनोरमायाम् ‘अनाङिति पर्युदासात्’ इत्यादि तच्चिन्त्यम् । ‘ओत्’ सूत्रे भाष्यकारैः प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधस्यैवाङ्गीकृतत्वात् । नच लक्ष्यभेदाभावात्प्रौढिवादमात्रं भाष्यमिति वाच्यम् । अस्मादेव भाष्यवचनाल्लक्ष्यभेदोऽप्यस्तीति सुवचत्वात् । तथाहि । अततेऽङ्कः अः, ‘अकारो वासुदेवः स्यात्’ इति वचना-द्रुढिशब्दो वा । अनेन अशब्देन सह ‘आङ्कार्यादाभिविध्योः’ इति आङोऽव्ययीभावे सवर्णदीर्घे ‘अव्ययी-भावश्च’ इति नपुंसकलाङ्गस्त्वे सोरम्यमि पूर्वं च कृते अमिति रूपं भाष्यकृत्संमतम् । तथा इणो निष्ठायामितः, वेजस्तु-निष्ठायां संप्रसारणे उतः, ‘अम् इतः एतः, अम् उतः ओतः’ इत्यासमुद्रक्षितिवत्समासे रूपं च तत्संमतम् । तत्र पर्युदा-सपक्षे अमि पूर्वो गुणश्च न सिध्यति । अशब्दस्याङ्भिन्नत्वात्स्यानिवद्भावेन निपातत्वाच्च प्रगृह्यत्वात् । प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधाश्रये तु सिध्यति, तस्याङ्त्वेन प्रगृह्यत्वनिषेधात् । न चैतादृशप्रयोगोऽप्रामाणिक इति वक्तुं युक्तम् । प्रकृतभाष्यस्यैव प्रमाण-त्वात् । अन्यथा हि भाष्यकारेङ्गितमात्रावलम्वनेन तत्र प्राचां ग्रन्थानामधिक्षेपाय भवतां प्रवृत्तयो व्याहन्येरन्नित्याशङ्कुः ॥—आङ्कजं इति । प्रतिषेधपक्षे तु प्रगृह्यः स्यादित्येतदुत्तरमिदं द्रष्टव्यम् । वज्यंत इति वज्रः । वृजेर्ण्यन्तात्कर्मणि धन् । वज्रं-नीय इत्यर्थः । आङो न भवतीति यावत् ॥—आ एवमिति । पूर्वप्रकान्तवाक्यार्थस्य अन्यथालयोतकोऽयमाकारः, पूर्वमित्यं नामस्थाः इदानीं त्वेवं मन्यस इत्यर्थः ॥—आ एवं किलेति । स्मरणद्योतकोऽयमाकारः ॥—वाक्यस्मरण-योरित्यादि । अत्रायमाशयः । ‘ईषदर्थे क्रियायोगे मर्यादाभिविधौ च यः । एतमातं डितं विद्याद्वाक्यस्मरणयोरडित्’ इति भाष्यस्याडिल्लक्षण एव तात्पर्यं, लाघवात् । अन्यस्य डित्वं लर्थसिद्धम् । ‘ईषदर्थे—’ इत्यादिस्त्वेकदेशानुवादः । एवं च अश्रुं अप इत्यत्र सप्तम्यर्थवृत्तेरप्याकारस्य डित्वात् ‘आडोऽनुनासिकशुन्दसि’ इति प्रवर्तत इति

Bālamanoramā

निपात एकाजनाङ् - निपात एकाच् ।प्रगृह्यमित्यनुवर्तते, पुंलिङ्गतया च विपरिणम्यते । एकाश्चासावच्चेति कर्मधारयः । तदाह — एकोऽजित्यादिना । इ विस्मये इति । इ इति चादित्वान्निपातः । स च आश्चर्ये वर्तत इत्यर्थः । इ इन्द्रः । उ उमेशः । इ इति उ इति निपातः । सम्बोधने उभयोरपि एकाच्त्वान्निपातत्वाच्च प्रगृह्रत्वान्न सन्धिः ।अना॑ङित्यत्र ङकारानुबन्धस्य प्रयोजनमाह - अनाङित्युक्तेरिति । आ एवमिति । पूर्व प्रक्रान्तवाक्यार्थस्याऽन्यथात्वद्योतकोऽयमाकारः । पूर्वमित्थं नामंस्था इदानीं त्वेवं मन्यसे इत्यर्थः । आ एवमिति । स्मरणद्योतकोऽयमाकारः । इहोभयत्रापि आकारस्य ङित्त्वाऽभावान्न पर्युदासः । ङित्त्विति । ङित्तु आकारः प्रगृह्रो न भवति, अनाङिति पर्युदासादित्यर्थः । ओष्णमिति । आ-उष्णमित्यत्र आकारस्य ङित्त्वात्प्रगृह्रत्वाऽभावे सति आद्गुणः । ननु प्रयोगदशायां ङकारस्याऽश्रवणाविशेषान्ङिदङिद्विवेकः कथमित्यत आह-वाक्येति । प्रक्रान्तवाक्यार्थस्यान्यथात्वे स्मरणे च अङित् । अन्यत्र=ईषदाद्यर्थे गम्ये, ङिदिति विवेकः — भेदोऽवगन्तव्य इत्यर्थः । तथाच भाष्यम्-॒ईषदर्थे क्रियायोगे मर्यादाभिविधौ च यः । एतमातांङितं विद्याद्वाक्यस्मरणयोरङित्॥॑ इति॥एकोऽच् यस्ये॑ति बहुव्रीहिस्तु नाश्रितः, तथा सतिप्रेद॑मित्यादाबतिप्रसङ्गात् ।

nipāta ekāj anāṅ — "nipāta ekāc": pragṛhyam recurs (anuvṛtti) [from A 1.1.11], and is transformed into the masculine gender to agree. ekāc is a karmadhāraya: "that which is single and [is] a vowel (ac)." Hence he says "eko 'j (a single-vowelled one)," etc. "i vismaye": "i" is a nipāta by belonging to the cādi [group] (cādayo 'sattve), and it denotes wonder (āścarya) — this is the meaning. "i indraḥ; u umeśaḥ": "i" and "u" are nipātas; in the vocative, both, being ekāc and being nipātas, are pragṛhya, so there is no sandhi. He states the purpose of the ṅ-anubandha in anāṅ with "since [the rule] says anāṅ." "ā evam": this ā indicates a change (anyathātva) in the sense of a sentence begun earlier — the meaning being "formerly you did not think [so], but now you think thus." "ā evam" [again]: this ā indicates recollection (smaraṇa). Here, in both cases, since the ā is not ṅit, there is no exclusion (paryudāsa) [and so it remains pragṛhya]. "But the ṅit": the ṅit ā [i.e. āṅ] is not pragṛhya, because of the exclusion anāṅ — this is the meaning. "oṣṇam": in ā-uṣṇam, since the ā [= āṅ, 'slightly'] is ṅit and hence not pragṛhya, ād-guṇa [A 6.1.87] [gives o]. — Objection: since in actual usage the ṅ is not heard in either case, how is the ṅit to be distinguished from the aṅit? To this he says "vākya": in [the sense of] a change in the meaning of a begun sentence, and in recollection, [the ā is] aṅit; elsewhere — when the senses "a little," etc. are to be understood — it is ṅit; thus the distinction (viveka), the difference, is to be grasped. And so the Bhāṣya [states]: "The ā that [is used] in the sense of 'a little'… in [the senses of] a sentence and recollection, it is aṅit." The bahuvrīhi analysis "that which has a single vowel (eko 'c yasya)" is not adopted; for on that [analysis] there would be over-extension (atiprasaṅga) in cases like predam (pra + idam), [where "pra" too has a single vowel].

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 36 उच्च इति—नायं प्रत्याहारः, तथा सति उच्यहणमेव कार्यम् , हल्यु विशेषाभावात् । तस्मादून्य्यहणसामर्थ्यान्निपातोऽयम् । अर्थग्रहणं किमिति—‘ईदृतौ सप्तमी’ इत्येवंसूत्रेऽपि यद्यपि ‘संज्ञाविधौ प्रत्ययसङ्ग्रहो तदन्तसङ्ग्रहं क्रिस्तिरं सहति परिभाषया

translator notes

textual The digital source reads nāmaṃsthāḥ (नामंस्थाः) in the gloss on the first 'ā evam'; the translation follows the evidently intended na maṃsthāḥ ('you did not think').

SK 104 · A 1.1.15प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

ओत् ॥ १०४ ॥

ot (1.1.15) — A particle (nipāta) ending in o is pragṛhya.

Rule. A particle (nipāta) ending in o is pragṛhya. nipāta is carried forward from SK 103.

Example.

aho + īśāḥ → aho is a particle ending in o → pragṛhya → no av substitution → aho īśāḥ ("Ah, the lords!").

Siddhānta-kaumudī

ओदन्तो निपातः प्रगृह्यः स्यात् । अहो ईशाः ॥

A particle (nipāta) ending in o (odanta) is pragṛhya. [Example:] aho īśāḥ.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 36

—ओत् ॥ निपात इति किम् । देवोऽसि, वायवायाहि ॥—संबुद्धाविति ॥—ऋषिवेदः ‘तदुक्तमृषिणा’ इत्यादौ तथा दर्शनादित्यभिप्रेत्याह—अवैदिक इति । संबुद्धौ किम् । अहो इति । अत्र परलाद्विकल्पो मा भूत् । न च ‘ओत्’ इति सूत्रस्य निरवकाशत्वं शङ्क्यम् । अहो ईशा इत्यादौ तस्य सावकाशत्वात् । इताविति किम् । पटोऽत्र ॥—उजः ॥ ‘निपात एकाच्—इति नित्यं प्राप्ते विभाषेयम् ॥ शाकल्यस्येतौ प्रगृह्यमिति चात्रानुवर्तते तदाह—इतौ वा प्रागुक्तमिति । इह ‘उज ॐ’ इत्येकमेव सूत्रं योगविभागेन व्याख्यातम् । एकसूत्रत्वे तु उज इतौ ॐ शाकल्यस्य, इत्यर्थात् ‘ॐइति’ इत्येव रूपं शाकल्यमते सिध्यति । अन्येषां तु मते नित्यं प्रगृह्य इति ‘उइति’ इत्येव रूपं सिध्यति, वितीति रूपं तु न सिध्यत्येवेति ज्ञेयम् ॥—ॐ ॥—अनुनासिक इति । तेनास्मिन् परे ‘यरोऽनुनासिके—’ इति विकल्पः । यदेतनूं इति पठसि यदेतद् इति वा । एतदर्थमेवात्रानुनासिकप्रहणम् । अन्यथा ‘यरो जम्यनुनासिको वा’ इत्येवावक्ष्यत् । ‘यरो जमि जम्वा’ इत्येवावक्ष्यदित्युक्तौ तु यथासंख्यप्रवृत्त्या अम्मयं तत्रेत्यादिसिद्धावपि चिन्मयं एतन्मुरारिरिति न सिध्येत् । ‘कृन्मेजन्तः’, ‘डमुणित्यम्’ इत्यादिनिर्देशाश्रयणे तु प्रतिपत्तिगौरवम् । वस्तुतस्तु ‘यरोऽनुनासिके जम्वा’ इत्येव सूत्रयितुं युक्तमित्याहुः ॥ प्रगृह्यमित्यनुवर्तनादाह—प्रगृह्यश्चेति । ननु दीर्घोच्चारणसामर्थ्यादेव प्रकृतिभावसिद्धौ किमनेन प्रगृह्यत्वेनेति चेदत्राहुः । प्रगृह्यप्रगृह्ययोर्द्वयोरप्युचोरादेशापत्तौ प्रगृह्यादेशे प्रकृतिभावादिष्टसिद्धावपि अप्रगृह्यादेशस्यानुनासिको वकारः स्यात्तद्वारणाय प्रगृह्यलाश्रयणमिति । आदेशस्यास्य स्थानिवत्त्वेनोत्पादुज इति प्रगृह्यत्वविकल्पे प्राप्ते नित्यार्थं तदाश्रयणमित्यन्ये । यदि तु प्रगृह्यमित्यस्य स्थानिविशेषणत्वं स्वीकृत्य ‘प्रगृह्यस्योजः ॐ इत्ययमादेशः’ इति व्याख्यायते, तदा दीर्घानुनासिकोक्तिवत्प्रगृह्यश्चेत्युक्तिरपि स्वरूपकथनमेवेति बोध्यम् । ॐ इत्यत्र यदि शाकल्यस्येति नापेक्ष्यते, तदा प्रगृह्यस्योजो नित्यमादेशः स्यात्ततश्च विति ॐ इति एते द्वे रूपे स्याताम्, तस्माच्छाकल्यप्रहणानुवृत्त्या आदेशविकल्पे सिद्धे त्रीणि रूपाणि सिध्यन्तीति कैयटस्तदाह—अयमादेशो वा स्यादिति ॥—वत्प्रस्यासिद्धत्वादिति । अत एवेदं वत्तं त्रिपाद्यां विधीयते । प्रकृतिभावमात्रवाधनार्थत्वे हि ‘इको यण्—’ इत्यनन्तरं ‘मय उजो वा’ इत्येवावक्ष्यत् यणं चान्ववर्तयिष्यत्

SK 105 · A 1.1.16प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येतावनार्षे ॥ १०५ ॥

sambuddhau śākalyasyetāvanārṣe

sambuddhau śākalyasyetāvanārṣe (1.1.16) — [the o occasioned] by the sambuddhi is, in Śākalya's view, [pragṛhya] before the word iti, in non-ārṣa (non-Vedic) [usage].

Rule. In Śākalya's view, an o that owes its existence to the vocative singular ending (sambuddhi) is pragṛhya before a non-Vedic iti. The rule is optional, since a teacher is named. ārṣa means "found in the Veda"; anārṣe, "in non-Vedic usage".

Example.

viṣṇo + iti → the o of viṣṇo arose in the vocative (by guṇa of the short final, A 7.3.108) → Śākalya: pragṛhya → viṣṇo iti.

viṣṇo + iti → the other alternative: the o is not pragṛhya → the av substitution → viṣṇav iti.

Applies when / blocked by. viṣṇo ends in o but is not a particle, so SK 104 cannot name it; this rule is needed. Why anārṣe? In the Vedic brahmabandhav ity abravīt ("he said, 'O kinsman of brāhmaṇas'") the o is not pragṛhya, and av appears. Bhaṭṭoji lists a third form, viṣṇa iti, without saying which alternative it belongs to; his commentators do not spell out its derivation.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

सम्बुद्धिनिमित्तक ओकारो वा प्रगृह्योऽवैदिके इतौ परे । विष्णो इति । विष्ण इति । विष्णविति । अनार्ष इति किम् । ब्रह्मबन्धवित्यब्रवीत् ॥

The o-sound occasioned by the sambuddhi is optionally (vā) pragṛhya before a non-Vedic "iti". [Examples:] viṣṇo iti; viṣṇa iti; viṣṇav iti. Why "anārṣe" (non-Vedic)? [Because in the Vedic case:] brahmabandhav ity abravīt ("he said, 'O kinsman-of-brahmins'" — here, being ārṣa, [it is not pragṛhya, so yaṇ-sandhi applies]).

Bālamanoramā

सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येतावनार्षे - संबुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येति । सम्बुद्धाविति निमित्तसप्तमी, ओदित्यनुवृत्तेन सहाऽन्वेति ।प्रगृह्र॑मित्यनुवर्तते, स च पुंलिङ्गतया विपरिणम्यते । ऋषिः=वेदः ।तदुक्तमृषिणे॑त्यादौ तथा दर्शनात् । ऋषौ भवः — आर्षः, न आर्षः-अनार्षः । अवैदिके इतिशब्दे परत इत्यर्थः । शाकल्यग्रहणाद्विकल्पस्तदाह — संबुद्धिनिमित्तक इति । विष्णो इतीति । अत्र ओकारो 'ह्रस्वस्य गुण' इति सम्बुद्धिनिमित्तकः । अत्र ओदन्तत्वेऽपि निपातत्वाऽभावादप्राप्ते विभाषेयम् ।विष्ण॑वितीति प्रगृह्रत्वाऽभावे रूपम् ।

sambuddhau śākalyasyetāvanārṣe — sambuddhau śākalyasya. "sambuddhau" is a nimitta-saptamī (a locative denoting the conditioning cause), and it construes together with "o" carried forward [from the preceding rule]. "pragṛhyam" is carried forward, and — being [neuter] — it is transformed into the masculine [to agree with "o"]. ṛṣi = the Veda; for so it is seen in "tad uktam ṛṣiṇā" and the like [where ṛṣi means the Veda]. "ārṣa" = that which occurs in the ṛṣi (Veda); "anārṣa" = not ārṣa. The meaning [of anārṣe]: when a non-Vedic word "iti" follows. From the mention of Śākalya [comes] the option (vikalpa); he states this with "sambuddhinimittakaḥ…" [the o occasioned by the sambuddhi is optionally pragṛhya]. "viṣṇo iti" — here the o is occasioned by the sambuddhi through hrasvasya guṇaḥ (A 7.3.108) [guṇa for the short final in the vocative]. Although it here ends in o, since it is not a nipāta [pragṛhya] would not [otherwise] apply; hence this optional [rule]. "viṣṇav iti" — this is the form when there is no pragṛhya-status [i.e. when the option does not take effect and the vowel-substitution v applies].

translator notes

translator The Kaumudī lists three example-forms (viṣṇo iti, viṣṇa iti, viṣṇav iti); the Bālamanoramā spells out only viṣṇo iti (the pragṛhya alternative) and viṣṇav iti (the non-pragṛhya alternative, with v for the o before the vowel). The derivation of the middle form viṣṇa iti is not made explicit in the commentary.

SK 106 · A 1.1.17प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

उञः ॥ १०६ ॥

uñaḥ

uñaḥ — Of the particle uñ (= u), [there is optionally the pragṛhya designation, in Śākalya's view, before iti].

Rule. The particle uñ — the u whose marker is ñ — is optionally pragṛhya before iti. Bhaṭṭoji says "as stated before": the words śākalyasya and itau of SK 105 are carried forward, and Śākalya's name brings the option.

Example.

u + iti → uñ before iti → pragṛhya → u iti.

u + iti → the other alternative: not pragṛhya → yaṇ → v iti.

Applies when / blocked by. By SK 103, uñ, a single-vowel particle, is already pragṛhya invariably. This rule turns that into an option before iti, and that is what makes the sandhi form v iti possible at all.

Watch out. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators treat the received text uñ ūm̐ as one sūtra that is explained as two, SK 106 and SK 107. Read as a single sūtra it would yield only ūm̐ iti and u iti; the split is what admits the third form v iti.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

उञ इतौ वा प्रागुक्तम् । उ इति । विति ॥

Regarding uñ before iti, [the pragṛhya designation] optionally [applies] — this was stated before. u iti. v iti.

Bālamanoramā

उञ ऊँ - ऊँ । इदमप्येकपदं सूत्रम् । ऊँ इति दीर्घस्याऽनुनासिकस्य ऊकारस्य लुप्तप्रथमाविभक्तिकस्य निर्देशः । उञ इत्यनुवर्तते, इतौ शाकल्यस्य प्रगृह्रमिति च । तदाह — उञ इताविति । ऊँ ईतीति । उक्तविधे ऊँकारादेशे रूपम् । प्रगृह्रत्वात्प्रकृतिभावः । एतदादेशाऽबावपक्षे पूर्वसूत्रेण प्रगृह्रत्वे सतिउ इती॑ति रूपम् । प्रगृह्रत्वस्याप्यभावे सति यणादेशेविती॑ति रूपमिति त्रीणि रूपाणि फलितानि । तदेवमुञ ऊँ इत्येकमेव सूत्रं विभज्य व्याख्यातम् । एकसूत्रत्वे तु उञ इतौ परे 'ऊँ' इत्ययं दीर्घोऽनुनासिकः प्रगृह्रश्चादेशः शाकल्यामते स्यात् । तदभावपक्षे तुनिपात एका॑जिति नित्यं प्रगृह्रत्वमित्येतावल्लभ्येत । ततश्च 'ऊँ इति 'उ इती॑ति रूपद्वयमेव स्यात्,विती॑ति रूपं न लभ्येत । अतो विभज्य व्याख्यातम् ।

uñ ūṃ — ūṃ. This too is a one-word sūtra. "ūṃ" is a mention (nirdeśa) of the long nasalized ū-kāra with its first-case ending elided (lupta-prathamā-vibhaktika). "uñaḥ" is carried forward (anuvṛtti), and so are "itau" (before iti), "śākalyasya" (in Śākalya's view), and "pragṛhyam." He states this with "uñ itau" ["of uñ, before iti"].

ūṃ īti: this is the form when the aforesaid ūṃ-kāra substitute is [made for uñ before iti]; because of being pragṛhya there is prakṛti-bhāva (retention of the base form, i.e., no sandhi). On the alternative where this substitute [ūṃ] is not made, when there is pragṛhya-designation by the previous sūtra [uñaḥ], the form is "u iti." And when there is no pragṛhya either, with the yaṇ substitute [u → v], the form is "v iti." Thus three forms result.

Thus in this way the single sūtra "uñ ūṃ" has been explained by splitting [it into two, uñaḥ and ūṃ]. But were it a single sūtra, then, in Śākalya's view, before a following iti this long nasalized pragṛhya substitute "ūṃ" would be [prescribed] for uñ; and on the alternative without that [substitute], only this much would be obtained — the invariable (nitya) pragṛhya-designation by "nipāta ekāc" [1.1.14]. And then only the two forms "ūṃ iti" and "u iti" would obtain; the form "v iti" would not be obtained. Therefore it has been explained by splitting [into two sūtras].

translator notes

translator The unit's sūtra header is uñaḥ (1.1.17), but the Bālamanoramā (pratīka <<uñ ūṃ>>) treats the received text as the single sūtra uñ ūṃ split into two, uñaḥ and ūṃ (1.1.18); the commentary's whole point is that this split yields the third form v iti.

SK 107 · A 1.1.18प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

ऊँ ॥ १०७ ॥

ūm̐

ūm̐ (1.1.18) — [The substitute] ūm̐ [for the particle uñ before iti] is pragṛhya.

Rule. For uñ before iti, the substitute ūm̐ — long, nasal (anunāsika), and itself pragṛhya — optionally occurs.

Example.

u + iti → uñ before iti → the substitute ūm̐ → being pragṛhya, it stays apart → ūm̐ iti.

Applies when / blocked by. With SK 106 this gives three correct forms for the particle before iti: ūm̐ iti (substitute made), u iti (no substitute, pragṛhya by SK 106), and v iti (no substitute, not pragṛhya, yaṇ).

Siddhānta-kaumudī

उञ इतौ दीर्घोऽनुनासिकः प्रगृह्यश्च ऊँ इत्ययमादेशो वा स्यात् । ऊँ इति ॥

For uñ, when iti follows, the substitute ūm̐ — [which is] long (dīrgha), nasalized (anunāsika), and pragṛhya — optionally occurs. [Example:] ūm̐ iti.

SK 108 · A 8.3.33V

मय उञो वो वा ॥ १०८ ॥

maya uño vo vā

maya uño vo vā — For uñ following a maY consonant, va is optionally the substitute, when a vowel (ac) follows.

Rule. After a maY consonant, the particle uñ optionally becomes va when a vowel follows. maY is the pratyāhāra read off the Śivasūtras from ma to the marker y; the m of kim is one. aci, "when a vowel follows", is carried forward from an earlier sūtra.

Example.

kimu + uktam → the u is uñ, after the m of kim, before a vowel → optionally va → kimvuktam ("what was said?"); otherwise kimu uktam.

Applies when / blocked by. The rule is needed because uñ is invariably pragṛhya by SK 103, so yaṇ could never give the v. Why is it placed here, in the Tripādī, with the extra word va, rather than next to iko yaṇ aci as a simple option of yaṇ? Because of asiddha. Placed early, the v would be visible to the rule mo 'nusvāraḥ, which turns m into anusvāra when v follows, and the m of kim would change. Placed in the Tripādī, after that anusvāra rule, the va substitution is asiddha for it, and the m stays.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

मयः परस्य उञो वो वा स्यादचि । किमु उक्तम् । किम्वुक्तम् । वत्वस्यासिद्धत्वान्नानुस्वारः ॥

For the uñ following a maY [consonant], va is optionally the substitute, when a vowel (ac) follows. kimu uktam. kimvuktam. Because the va-substitution (vatva) is asiddha, there is no anusvāra.

Bālamanoramā

मय उञो वो वा - मय उञो वो वा । 'मय' इति पञ्चमी, 'उञ' इति षष्ठी । 'ङमो ह्रस्वादचि' इत्यतोऽचीत्युवर्तते, तदाह — मयः परस्येति । किम्वुक्तमिति ।किमु उक्त॑मिति स्थिते मकारोत्तरोकारस्य उञो 'निपात एकाच्' इति नित्यं प्रगृह्रत्वात्प्रकृतिभावाद्यणभावे प्राप्ते वत्ववचनमिदम् । ननु तर्हीको यणचीत्यनन्तरमेवमय उञो वे॑ति पठितव्यं, वग्रहणाऽभावेन लाघवात् । त्रिपाद्यां पाठे वग्रहणस्यापि कर्तव्यत्वेन गोरवादित्यत आह — वत्वस्येति । यदि षष्ठस्य प्रथमे पादे इको यणचीत्यत्रैव मय उञो यणादेशविकल्पो विधीयेत,तर्हि किम्वुक्तमित्यत्र 'मोऽनुस्वार' इति मकारस्य वकारे परेऽनुस्वारः स्यात् । त्रिपाद्यां वत्वविधौ तु तस्याऽसिद्धत्वान्नानुस्वारः । त्रिपाद्यामनुस्वारविध्यपेक्षया वत्वविधेः परत्वादिति भावः ।

maya uño vo vā — "maya" is a fifth case [ablative, "after a maY"], "uñ" a genitive ["of uñ"]. From [the sūtra] "ṅamo hrasvād aci," "aci" ("when a vowel follows") is carried forward (anuvṛtti); he states this with "mayaḥ parasya" ["of what follows a maY"].

kimvuktam: when kimu uktam stands, since the u-kāra following the ma-kāra — being uñ — is invariably (nitya) pragṛhya by "nipāta ekāc" [1.1.14], so that prakṛti-bhāva [obtains] and yaṇ [u → v] would not apply, this statement of vatva [is made, to supply the v-substitution optionally].

Objection: then this ["maya uño vā"] should be stated right after "iko yaṇ aci," and would be more economical (lāghava) by omitting the mention of "va"; whereas reading it in the tripādī [the final three pādas] requires also mentioning "va," so there is prolixity (gaurava). To this he says "vatvasya...": if the option of the yaṇ substitute for uñ after a maY were prescribed in the first pāda of the sixth [adhyāya], right at "iko yaṇ aci," then in kimvuktam the anusvāra for the ma-kāra would apply by "mo 'nusvāraḥ," because the va-kāra follows. But when the vatva rule is [placed] in the tripādī, because it is asiddha, there is no anusvāra — this because, [both being] in the tripādī, the vatva rule is para (later) relative to the anusvāra rule, [hence asiddha with respect to it]. This is the idea.

SK 109 · A 1.1.19प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा

ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे ॥ १०९ ॥

īdūtau ca saptamyarthe

And [padas] ending in ī and ū [are pragṛhya] when they stand in the sense of the seventh (locative) case.

Rule. A pada ending in ī or ū that stands in the sense of the locative (saptamī) — its locative ending having been dropped — is pragṛhya. The dropping (luk) of the case-ending is by supāṃ suluk (SK 3561). pragṛhyam is carried forward and, since the sūtra speaks of two vowels, is read as a dual.

Example.

somo gaurī + adhiśritaḥ → gaurī stands for gauryām, "in the gaurī", its locative ending dropped → pragṛhya → no yaṇ → somo gaurī adhiśritaḥ ("the soma is set in the gaurī").

māmakī tanū + iti → māmakī tanū stands for māmakyāṃ tanvām, "in my body" → pragṛhya → māmakī tanū iti; in the padapāṭha māmakī iti, tanū iti.

Applies when / blocked by. Why artha, "in the sense of", rather than simply "in the locative"? To exclude a word that has passed into a different meaning inside a compound (vṛtti). vāpyām aśvaḥ compounds to vāpyaśvaḥ: the first member vāpī has lost its locative ending, but it no longer rests in the bare locative sense — it now bears on the horse as well — so it is not pragṛhya, and yaṇ runs. A form that keeps its locative ending, such as vātapramī, is not an example either, because the base itself does not then carry the locative sense.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

सप्तम्यर्थे पर्यवसन्नमीदूदन्तं प्रगृह्यं स्यात् । सोमो गौरी अधिश्रितः । मामकी तनू इति । सुपां सुलुक् SK 3561 इति सप्तम्या लुक् । अर्थग्रहणं किम् । वृत्तावर्थान्तरोपसङ्क्रान्ते माभूत् । वाप्यामश्वो वाप्यश्वः ॥

A [pada] ending in ī or ū that has come to rest in the sense of the locative (saptamyartha) is pragṛhya. Examples: somo gaurī adhiśritaḥ ("the soma is set upon [in] the gaurī"); māmakī tanū iti ("in my body"). The luk (dropping) of the locative case-ending here is by "supāṃ suluk…" (SK 3561). Why is "artha" (sense) mentioned [rather than simply saptamyām, "in the locative"]? So that [pragṛhya] should not apply where, within a compound (vṛtti), [the word] has passed over into a different meaning: vāpyām aśvaḥ → vāpyaśvaḥ.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 36–37

—ईदूतौ च—॥ ईदूताविति किम् । ‘प्रियः सूर्ये प्रियो अमा भवाति’ । अमिशब्दात्परस्याः सप्तम्याः ‘सुपां सुलुग्—’ इत्यादिना डा आदेशः । पदकारैः प्रगृह्येषु इतिशब्दप्रयोगस्य नियमितत्वेन इदापि पदकाले इतिशब्दप्रयोगप्रसङ्गः स चानिष्ट इति बोध्यम् । सप्तमीप्रहणं किम् । धीती । मती । सुष्ठती । धीत्या, मत्या, सुष्ट्या, इति प्राप्ते तृतीयैकवचनस्य पूर्वसवर्ण ईकारः । ततः ‘अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः’ इत्येकादेशः । न त्विह ‘सुपां सुलुक्—’ इति लुक्, हस्तश्रवणापत्तेः ॥—सोमो गौरी इति । वातप्रमी । अत्र ययी असक्त इत्याद्युदाहरणे सत्यप्यूकारान्तस्य लौकिकोदाहरणाभावाद् उभयोरपि वेद एवोदाहरणमुक्तम् ॥ मामकी तनू इति । यद्यप्यत्र संहितायां प्रगृह्यप्रयोजनं नास्ति, तथापि ‘मामकी इति’ ‘तनू इति’ पदकाले तदस्त्येव ‘स्वायां तनू ऋत्व्ये नाधमानाम्’ इत्यत्र तु संहिताकालेऽप्यस्ति, तथापि ‘ऋत्यकः’ इति पाक्षिकप्रकृतिभावेनाप्येतत्सिद्धं छन्दसि रूपान्तरस्यापादयितुमशक्यत्वादिति बोध्यम् ॥—सप्तम्या लुगिति । यदि धीत्यादाविव विभक्तेः पूर्वसवर्णे कृते सवर्णदीर्घ एकादेश इति व्याख्यायेत तदा एकादेशं वाधित्वा परलादाङ्गलाच्च ‘आण्नद्याः’ इत्याद् डेराम् च स्यादिति भावः ॥—अर्थप्रहणं किमिति । वाप्यश्च इत्यादावपि सप्तम्यर्थोऽस्त्येवेति नार्थोऽर्थग्रहणेनेति प्रश्नः ॥—अर्थान्तरोपसंक्रान्त इति । वाप्यश्च इत्यत्र यो वापीशब्दः स तु वाप्यधिकरणकद्रव्ये उपसंक्रान्तः, सोमो गौरी इत्यत्र गौरीशब्दस्तु सप्तम्यर्थमात्रे पर्यवसन्नः न तु तदधिकरणद्रव्ये वृत्त्यभावादिति भेदः

Bālamanoramā

ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे - ईदूतौ च ।प्रगृह्र॑मित्यनुवर्तते । तच्च द्विवचनान्ततया विपरिणम्यते । शब्दस्वरूपस्य विशेष्यत्वात्तदन्तविधिः ।ईदूतौ च सप्तम्या॑वित्येव सिद्धेऽर्थग्रहणाद्यत्र सप्तम्या लुकियः शिष्यते स लुप्यमानार्थाभिधायी॑ इति न्यायेन प्रकृतेरेव सप्तम्यर्थे पर्यवसानं तथाविधत्वमीदूदन्तयोर्गम्यते । तथाच सप्तम्यर्थे पर्यवसन्नावीदूदन्तौ शब्दौ प्रगृह्रौ स्त इत्यक्षरार्थः । फलितमाह — सप्तम्यर्थ इत्यादिना । सोमो गौरी इति । गौर्यामित्यर्थः ।सुपां सुलु॑गिति सप्तम्या लुक् । प्रगृह्रत्वे प्रकृतिभावान्न यण् । वातप्रमीत्यादिसप्तम्यन्तं तु नात्रोदाहरणम्, तत्र सप्तम्या लुप्तत्वाऽभावेन प्रकृतेः सप्तम्यर्थेऽप्रवृत्तेः । मामकी तनू इति । मामक्यां तन्वामित्यर्थः ।सुपां सुलु॑गिति सप्तम्यालुक् । प्रगृह्रेभ्यः परत इतिशब्दप्रयोगस्य पदकारैर्नियमितत्वात् पदपाठे 'मामकी इति'तनू इती॑त्यत्र प्रगृह्रत्वफलं बोध्यम् । ननु 'ईदूतौ च सप्तम्याः' इत्येव सूत्र्यताम् । षटआ चाऽर्थद्वारा संबन्धो विवक्ष्यतां, ततश्च सप्तम्यर्थे विद्यमानमीदूदन्तमित्यर्थस्यार्थग्रहणं विनैव लाभादर्थग्रहणं किमर्थमिति पृच्छति — अर्थग्रहणं किमिति । कस्म#ऐ प्रयोजनायेत्यर्थः ।कि॑मित्यव्ययम् । वृत्ताविति । अर्थग्रहणसामर्थ्याल्लुप्तसप्तम्यर्थमात्रे पर्यवसन्नमित्यर्थो विवक्षितः । ततश्च समासवृत्तौ लुप्तसप्तमीके ईदूदन्तपूर्वपदे सप्तम्यर्थमतिलङ्घ्य उत्तरपदार्थे प्रवृत्ते सति प्रगृह्रसंज्ञा न भवति । मा भूदिति । 'माङि लुङ्' सर्वलकारापवादः । वाप्यआ इति । 'वाप्याम् — अआ' इति विग्रहे सुप्सुपेति समासे 'वाप्यआ' इति रूपमित्यर्थः । अत्र वाप्यामिति सप्तम्या अधिकरणत्वमवगतं, तच्चाधिकरणकारकं क्रियापेक्षं । तत्र वाप्यामआओ वर्तत इति क्रियाध्याहारे वर्तमानक्रियायां वाप्या विद्यमानेऽओ लक्षमया प्रवृतिंत पुरस्कृत्य समासो वक्तव्यः । एवं च समासे लुप्तसप्तमीकस्य वापीशब्दस्य सप्तम्यर्थमतिलङ्घ्य तत्संसृष्टे आधेयभूतेऽओऽपि प्रवृत्तेः सप्तम्यर्थमात्राविश्रान्त्यभावान्न प्रगृह्रत्वमिति भावः ।

īdūtau ca saptamyarthe — īdūtau ca. "pragṛhyam" is carried forward (anuvṛtti); and that [word, being singular in its source rule] is transformed into a dual-ending form [to agree with the dual "īdūtau"]. Since the word-form itself is the qualificand (viśeṣya), there is the tadanta-vidhi [i.e. "īdūtau" denotes words ending in ī and ū]. Although the [rule] would be established simply by "īdūtau ca saptamyām" ["ending in ī/ū in the locative"], because of the taking of "artha," by the maxim "where, upon the luk of the locative, what remains [the base] is the expressent of the meaning of the elided [case] (lupyamānārthābhidhāyin)," it is understood that the base itself comes to rest in the locative sense, and that this character (being so at rest) belongs to the [words] ending in ī and ū. And thus the literal sense (akṣarārtha) is: two words ending in ī and ū that have come to rest in the locative sense are pragṛhya. He states the upshot (phalita) with "saptamyarthe…" [the words of the Kaumudī]. "somo gaurī" — the meaning is gauryām ("in the gaurī"). The luk of the locative is by "supāṃ suluk." Being pragṛhya, there is prakṛtibhāva (retention of the original form), so no yaṇ. But a locative-ending form such as vātapramī is not an example here, because there, the locative not being elided, the base does not [itself] function in the locative sense. "māmakī tanū" — the meaning is māmakyāṃ tanvām ("in my body"). The luk of the locative is by "supāṃ suluk." Since the use of the word "iti" after pragṛhyas has been regulated by the authors of the padapāṭha, in the padapāṭha the fruit of pragṛhya-hood is to be understood in "māmakī iti" and "tanū iti" [where iti follows and pragṛhya blocks the sandhi]. Objection: let the sūtra instead be framed simply as "īdūtau ca saptamyāḥ" [genitive], and let the relation of the genitive be intended by way of "artha" (meaning); then, since the sense "[a word] ending in ī/ū present in the locative sense" is obtained even without the word "artha," what is the purpose of taking "artha"? — this he asks with "arthagrahaṇaṃ kim," meaning "for what purpose?"; here "kim" is an indeclinable. "vṛttau" — by the force of taking "artha," the intended sense is "[a word] that has come to rest in [nothing beyond] the mere meaning of the elided locative." And so, in a compound-vṛtti, when the first member ending in ī/ū — whose locative has been elided — passes beyond the locative sense and operates in the sense of the second member, the designation pragṛhya does not arise. "mā bhūt" [in the Kaumudī's mā bhūt] — the aorist [is] by "māṅi luṅ" [A 3.3.175], an apavāda of all the [other] lakāras. "vāpyaśvaḥ" — the analysis is "vāpyām aśvaḥ"; when compounded by "sup supā," the form is vāpyaśvaḥ. Here "vāpyām" (locative) is understood to convey the locus-relation (adhikaraṇatva), and that adhikaraṇa-kāraka depends on an action. There, supplying the action in "a horse dwells in the tank (vāpyām aśvo vartate)," the compound is to be stated with the operation proceeding by implication (lakṣaṇā) upon the horse present in the tank during the ongoing action. And thus, in the compound, since the word vāpī — whose locative is elided — passes beyond the locative sense and operates also upon the aśva, the located thing (ādheya) associated with it, there being no resting in the mere locative sense, there is no pragṛhya-hood. This is the point.

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 37 १ वाप्यश्च इति । अर्थग्रहणसामर्थ्यात् समभिव्याहृतपदान्तराथोनन्वयित्वेनोपास्थितिविषयसप्तम्यर्थपथवसन्नस्यैव सप्तम्यन्तस्य ग्रहणं भवतीति वृत्तावुत्तरपदार्थान्वयित्वस्य सप्तम्यर्थे सत्वान्न तस्य ग्रहणमिति न दोष इति भावः । २ अण इति—नायमण् परणका-रेण, तथासति अप्रगृह्यस्येति पर्युदासेन हल्यप्रवृत्तौ अज्यग्रहणमेव कुर्यात् इति केचिदाहुः । ३ योगे इति—संयोगे इत्यर्थः । सत्या, भामा इति वत् योग इत्युक्तिः । संयोगश्चान्यवहितयोरेव ।

translator notes

textual In the source the word aśva is repeatedly corrupted in this block: "vāpyaā" (for vāpyaśvaḥ), "vāpyāmaā"/"aā" (for vāpyām aśvaḥ), "vāpyāmaāo"/"'o"/"ao" (for vāpyām aśvo / aśvaḥ). The evident reading aśva has been followed throughout, consistent with the Kaumudī's own "vāpyām aśvo vāpyaśvaḥ."

SK 110 · A 8.4.57V

अणोऽप्रगृह्यस्यानुनासिकः ॥ ११० ॥

aṇo'pragṛhyasyānunāsikaḥ

aṇo 'pragṛhyasyānunāsikaḥ — For an aṇ (a, i, u) that is not a pragṛhya, the anunāsika (its nasalized counterpart) optionally occurs at a pause (avasāna).

Rule. An aṇ vowel that is not pragṛhya optionally becomes anunāsika — nasal — at a pause (avasāna). The words vā, "optionally", and avasāne are carried forward. Here aṇ is formed with the first ṇ of the Śivasūtras, so it means a, i, u only, on the strength of the traditional exposition.

Example.

dadhi at a pause → its final i is an aṇ and not pragṛhya → optionally nasal → dadhiṃ (the ṃ marks the nasal i) or dadhi.

agnī at a pause → the ī of the dual is pragṛhya (SK 100) → not nasalised → agnī.

Applies when / blocked by. Why "not pragṛhya"? So that a pragṛhya vowel such as the ī of agnī stays as it is; the exemption of this chapter is mirrored here. Because aṇ is read as a i u, the final ṛ of kartṛ is not nasalised.

Watch out. This sūtra closes Bhaṭṭoji's section on vowel sandhi (ac-sandhi). Bhaṭṭoji's commentators remark that the very name ac-sandhi shows no sandhi between ac and sandhi; the grammar allows a technical word to be left uncombined to avoid ambiguity.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

अप्रगृह्यस्याणोऽवसानेऽनुनासिको वा स्यात् । दधिं । दधि । अप्रगृह्यस्य किम् । अग्नी ॥

For an aṇ that is not a pragṛhya, at a pause (avasāna) there is optionally (vā) an anunāsika (nasalized) [substitute]. [Examples:] dadhiṃ / dadhi. Why "not a pragṛhya"? [To exclude] agnī [a pragṛhya dual, which does not nasalize].

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 37

—अणोऽग्रगृह्यस्य—। अण इति किम् । हर्तृ कर्तृ ॥—अरुसंधिरिति । कुलं श्रुलं वात्र न कृतं स्पष्टप्रतिपत्त्यर्थम् । अत एवानुसारस्याप्यच्लादित्यादिनिर्देशोऽप्युपपन्नः ॥ इति तत्त्वबोधिन्यां अच्संधिः ॥ अथ हृद्संधिः

Bālamanoramā

अणोऽप्रगृह्यस्यानुनासिकः - अणोऽप्रगृह्रस्य । 'वा॒अवसाने' इत्यनुवर्तते । तदाह — अप्रगृह्रेत्यादिना । अत्र अण् पूर्वेणैव णकारेण, व्याख्यानात् । ततस्च 'कर्तृ' इत्यत्र नानुनासिकः । इत्यच्संधीति । अल्पाच्तरमिति, सिद्धमनच्त्वादिति, कथमनच्त्वमिति च सूत्रवार्तिकभाष्यप्रयोगादेवजातीयस्थलेषु असंदेहार्थं संध्यभावोऽभ्यनुज्ञातः । अतोऽत्र कुत्वश्चुत्वयोरभावेऽपि न दोषः । इति*बालमनोरमायामच्सन्धिः ।अत तिङन्ते प्रत्ययमाला ।अथ प्रत्ययमालां वक्ष्यन्नाह — कण्डूयतेः सन्निति । 'धातोः कर्मणः' इत्यनेनेति भावः । प्रथमस्यैकाचेति ।अजादेर्द्वितीयस्ये॑ति द्वितीयैकाचो द्वित्वे प्राप्ते इत्यपि ज्ञेयम् ।कण्ड्वादेस्तृतीयस्येति ।एकाचो द्वित्व॑मिति शेषः ।कण्ड्वादे॑रित्यनन्तरंयगन्तस्ये॑ति शेषः, केवलकण्ड्वादिषु तृतीयैकाचोऽभावात् । कण्डूयियिषतीति । कण्डूयेति यगन्तात्सनि इटि अतो लोपः । इस् इति तृतीयस्यैकाचो द्वित्वम् । असु उपतापे । कण्ड्वादिः । असूयियिषति । अजादेस्तृतीयस्य एकाचो द्वित्वम् । क्यजन्तात्सन्निति । 'उदाह्यियते' इति शेषः । यथेष्टं नामधातुषु — इत्पि वार्तिकम । नाम = प्रातिपदिकं, तद्धटितधातुष्वित्यर्थः । अजादेस्त्वाद्येतरस्येति । अजादेरित्यनुवृत्त्या आदिभूतादचः पेरषामेकाचां यतेष्टमित्यर्थलाभादिति भावः । नदराणामिति । तेषां मध्ये आदिभूतादचः परस्यैवेत्यर्थः । इन्द्रीयतेः सन्निति । इन्द्रशब्दात् क्यजन्तात्सन्नित्यर्थः । द्रीशब्दयिशब्दयोरिति । नकारस्य आदिभूतादचः परत्वान्न द्वित्वम् । दकारस्य तु आदिभूतादचः परत्वाऽभावान्न द्वित्वनिषेध इति भावः । चिच्नद्रीयिषतीति । चन्द्रीयतेः सनि प्रथमस्यैकाचो द्वित्वम् । चन्द्रिद्रीयिषतीति । द्वितयीस्यैकाचो द्वित्वम् । प्रियमिति । प्रियमाख्यातुमिच्छतीत्यर्थे 'तत्करोति तदाचष्टे' इति ण्यन्तात्सनि इटि णाविष्ठवत्त्वात्प्रियशब्दस्यप्रियस्थिरे॑ति प्रादेशे वृद्धौ पुकि णिचो गुणाऽयादेशयोः षत्वे प्रापयिषेत्येव सन्नन्तम् । प्रियमाचक्षाणं प्रेरयितुमिच्छतीत्यर्ते तु प्रापि इति ण्यन्तादुक्ताद्धेतुमण्णौतद्नतात्सनि इटि द्वितीयं णिचमाश्रित्य प्रथमणिचो लोपेद्वितीयणिचो गुणाऽयादेशयोः प्रापयिषेत्येव सन्नन्तम् । तत्र यथेष्टं नामधातुष्वित्याद्यानां त्रयाणामेकाचामेकैकस्य द्वित्वेपिप्रापयिषती॑त्यादिरूपत्रयमित्यर्थः । उरुमिति । उरुमाख्यातुमाचक्षाणं प्रेरयितुं वेच्छतीत्यर्थे उरुशब्दाचष्टे इत्यर्थे णिचिप्रियस्थिरे॑ति वरादशे उपधावृद्धौ वारि इति ण्यन्तात्सनि इटि णिचो गुणाऽयादेशयोः षत्वे वारयिषेति सन्नन्तम् । माधवमते वृद्ध्याङ्गीकाराद्वारीत्यस्माद्धेतुमण्ण्यन्तात् सनि इटि प्रथमणेर्लोपे षत्वे वारयिषेत्येव रूपम् । तत्र यथेष्टं नामधातुषवित्येकैकस्य एकाचो द्वित्वे विवारयिषतीत्यादिरूपत्रयमित्यर्थः । बाढंसिसाधयिषतीति । बाढमाख्यातुमाचक्षाणं प्रेरयितुं वेच्छतीत्यर्थे णिजादि पूर्ववत् ।अन्तिकबाढयो॑रिति साधादेशः । तत्र सकारस्यादेशत्वाऽभावान्न षत्वम् । तदाह — षत्वं तु नास्तीति । बोभूयिषयिषतीत्यत्र प्रक्रियां दर्शयति — यङिति । 'भूधातो' रिति शेषः । द्वित्वे बोभूयेति स्थितम् । सन्निति । इटि अतो लोपे षत्वे बोभूयिषेति स्थितम् । ण्यन्तात्सन्निति । बोभूयिषेत्यस्माद्धेतुमण्णिचि अतो लोपे बोभूयिषि इति स्थितम् । तस्मात् सनि इटि णिचो गुणाऽयादेशयोः षत्वे बोभूयिषयिषेति स्थितम् । ततो लटस्तिपि शपि पररूपे बोभूयिषयिषतीति रूपम् ।अनभ्यासस्ये॑त्युक्तेर्न पुनर्द्वित्वम् । अथ बोभूययिषयतीत्यत्र प्रक्रियां दर्शयति — यङिति ।भूधातो॑रिति शेषः । द्वित्वे बोभूयेति स्थितम् । णिजिति । बोभूयेत्यस्माद्धेतुमण्णौ अतो लोपे बोभूयि इति स्थितम् । सन्नन्ताण्णिजिति । बोभूयि इत्यस्मात्सनि इटि णिचो गुणाऽयादेशयोः ष्टवे बोभूययिषेति स्थितम् । तस्माद्धेतुमण्णिचि अतो लोपे बोभूययिषि इत्यस्माल्लटस्तिपि शपि गुणाऽयादेशयोर्बोभूययिषयतीति रूपं सिद्धम् । प्रत्ययमाला समाप्ता । अथ पूर्वकृदन्तप्रकरणम् ।

aṇo 'pragṛhyasyānunāsikaḥ — aṇo 'pragṛhyasya. [The words] "vā" (optionally) and "avasāne" (at a pause) are carried forward (anuvṛtti). This [Bhaṭṭoji] states with "apragṛhya-" etc. Here the "aṇ" is [the pratyāhāra] formed with the earlier ṇ [i.e., aṇ = a, i, u only], on the strength of the [traditional] exposition (vyākhyāna); and therefore, in "kartṛ," there is no anunāsika [since ṛ falls outside this aṇ].

"iti acsandhiḥ" [the ac-sandhi section is thus concluded]. From the usage in sūtra, vārttika, and Bhāṣya of [metalinguistic forms like] "alpāctaram," "siddham anaktvāt," and "katham anaktvam," the absence of sandhi (sandhy-abhāva) is sanctioned (abhyanujñāta) in places of this sort, for the sake of avoiding ambiguity (asaṃdeha). Hence here [in the compound "ac-sandhi"], even though kutva (guttural substitution) and cutva (palatal substitution) do not take place, there is no fault. — Thus [ends] the ac-sandhi [section] in the Bālamanoramā.

Now, the suffix-garland (pratyayamālā) for [items] ending in tiṅ [finite verbs]. About to state the pratyayamālā, [Bhaṭṭoji] says "kaṇḍūyateḥ san" [the san after kaṇḍūyati]. The idea is: by "dhātoḥ karmaṇaḥ..." (A 3.1.7). "prathamasyaikācaḥ" (of the first single-vowel portion): it should also be understood that, by "ajāder dvitīyasya" (A 6.1.2), the doubling (dvitva) of the second single-vowel portion is [otherwise] applicable [for a vowel-initial root]. "kaṇḍvādes tṛtīyasya": [the phrase] "the doubling of the single-vowel portion" is to be supplied. After "kaṇḍvādeḥ," [the words] "that ends in the yak-suffix" are to be supplied, since in the bare kaṇḍvādi roots there is no third single-vowel portion.

"kaṇḍūyiyiṣati": from "kaṇḍūya," which ends in yak, with the san-suffix and the iṭ-augment, there is elision of the [final] a (ato lopa); "is" being the third single-vowel portion, its doubling [applies]. "asu" (in the sense of distress) — a kaṇḍvādi root: asūyiyiṣati; the doubling of the third single-vowel portion, the root being vowel-initial (ajādi). "kyajantāt san" (the san after a root ending in kyac): [the words] "is given as an example (udāhriyate)" are to be supplied. "yatheṣṭaṃ nāmadhātuṣu" (as one wishes, among denominative roots) — this is a vārttika. "nāma" means a prātipadika (nominal stem); so [nāmadhātu means] "among the roots formed from such [stems]." "ajādes tu ādyetarasya" (but for a vowel-initial [root], of any one other than the first): the idea is that, by the anuvṛtti of "ajādeḥ," the sense obtained is "as one wishes, among the single-vowel portions that follow the initial vowel." "nadarāṇām" [the syllables na, da, ra]: meaning, among those, only of what follows the initial vowel. "indrīyateḥ san": meaning, the san after "indrīya," formed with kyac from the word "indra." "of the syllable drī and the syllable yi": the idea is that there is no doubling of the na, since it follows the initial vowel, but there is no prohibition of doubling for the da, since it does not [immediately] follow the initial vowel. "cicnadrīyiṣati": from "candrīyati," with san, the doubling of the first single-vowel portion. "candridrīyiṣati": the doubling of the second single-vowel portion.

"priyam": in the sense "wishes to express (ākhyātum) priyam," by [the vārttika] "tatkaroti tadācaṣṭe" [forming a ṇic-denominative], from the ṇic-ending stem, with san and iṭ — because of ṇau-iṣṭhavat-hood, for the word "priya" [there is], by "priyasthira..." (A 6.4.157), the substitution of prā; then vṛddhi; the puk-augment; the guṇa and the ayādeśa of the ṇic; and ṣatva — [so that] the desiderative-final stem is precisely "prāpayiṣa." But in the sense "wishes to cause (prerayitum) [someone] who is expressing priyam" — from the ṇic-ending "prāpi" just mentioned, with the causative (hetumat) ṇi added, and from that stem with san and iṭ: relying on the second ṇic, with elision (lopa) of the first ṇic and the guṇa and ayādeśa of the second ṇic, the desiderative-final stem is again precisely "prāpayiṣa." There, by "yatheṣṭaṃ nāmadhātuṣu" etc., since any one of the three single-vowel portions is doubled one at a time, there result three forms: "prāpayiṣati" and so on.

"urum": in the sense "wishes to express urum, or to cause [someone] expressing it" — from the word "uru," in the sense "expresses (ācaṣṭe)," with ṇic; by "priyasthira..." (A 6.4.157) the substitution "var"; the vṛddhi of the penult (upadhā), [giving] "vāri"; from that ṇic-ending stem, with san and iṭ, the guṇa and ayādeśa of the ṇic, and ṣatva — the desiderative-final stem is "vārayiṣa." On Mādhava's view, since vṛddhi is accepted, from "vārī" [taken] as a causative ṇyanta, with san and iṭ, elision of the first ṇi, and ṣatva, the form is likewise "vārayiṣa." There, by "yatheṣṭaṃ nāmadhātuṣu," since each single-vowel portion is doubled one at a time, there result three forms: "vivārayiṣati" and so on.

"bāḍhaṃ sisādhayiṣati": in the sense "wishes to express bāḍham, or to cause [someone] expressing it," the ṇic and the rest as before; by "antikabāḍhayoḥ..." (A 5.3.63) the substitution "sādha" [for bāḍha]; there, since the s is not itself a substitute [but part of the substitute sādha], there is no ṣatva. This [Bhaṭṭoji] states with "ṣatvaṃ tu nāsti" (but there is no ṣatva).

For "bobhūyiṣayiṣati" he shows the procedure (prakriyā): "yaṅ" — [the words] "of the root bhū" are to be supplied. With the doubling [of the yaṅ-intensive], "bobhūya" stands. "san": with iṭ, elision of the [final] a, and ṣatva, "bobhūyiṣa" stands. "ṇyantāt san": from "bobhūyiṣa," with the causative ṇic and elision of the [final] a, "bobhūyiṣi" stands; from that, with san and iṭ, the guṇa and ayādeśa of the ṇic, and ṣatva, "bobhūyiṣayiṣa" stands. Then, with the tip [ending] of laṭ, the śap, and pararūpa, the form is "bobhūyiṣayiṣati." Because of the statement "anabhyāsasya...," there is no further doubling.

Now for "bobhūyayiṣayati" he shows the procedure: "yaṅ" — "of the root bhū" is to be supplied; with doubling, "bobhūya" stands. "ṇij": from "bobhūya," with the causative ṇi and elision of the [final] a, "bobhūyi" stands. "sannantāt ṇij" [the ṇij after the desiderative-final]: from "bobhūyi," with san and iṭ, the guṇa and ayādeśa of the ṇic, and ṣatva, "bobhūyayiṣa" stands. From that, with the causative ṇic and elision of the [final] a, [we get] "bobhūyayiṣi"; from that, with the tip of laṭ, the śap, and the guṇa and ayādeśa, the form "bobhūyayiṣayati" is established.

The pratyayamālā (suffix-garland) is completed. Now [begins] the earlier kṛdanta section (pūrvakṛdanta-prakaraṇa).

translator notes

textual The source segments as one BM block a stretch that runs past the sūtra 'aṇo 'pragṛhyasyānunāsikaḥ' through the ac-sandhi colophon and well into the pratyayamālā (kaṇḍvādi desideratives and denominative-desiderative derivations). It is translated here in full as transmitted; the derivational forms (kaṇḍūyiyiṣati, cicnadrīyiṣati, prāpayiṣati, vārayiṣati, bobhūyiṣayiṣati, bobhūyayiṣayati, etc.) are kept exactly as given. Minor digitization glitches were followed without silent emendation, e.g. 'इति*बालमनोरमायाम्' (a stray asterisk) and 'चष्टे' set off by a spurious avagraha.

← all prakaraṇas outline →