Prakaraṇa 43 · SK 2139–2150

द्विरुक्तप्रकरणम्

dviruktaprakaraṇam · 12 sūtras

SK 2139 · A 8.1.1द्विरुक्ताधिकारः

सर्वस्य द्वे ॥ २१३९ ॥

sarvasya dve

sarvasya dve — In place of the whole [word, with all its parts], two [word-forms occur].

Rule. This is an adhikāra, a heading. It says: "in place of the whole [word], two [word-forms come]". Its sense, "in place of the whole, two word-forms", is read into every rule to the end of the chapter, SK 2140 to SK 2150. Bhaṭṭoji writes only "taking this as the heading". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators supplies the rest: "the injunctions of doubling will be set out."

The name of the operation is dvirvacana, "doubling". Here it is a substitution. The word sarvasya "of the whole" names the thing replaced, the sthānin. The word dve "two" names the substitutes (ādeśa): two word-forms (śabdarūpe). So one word goes, and two identical word-forms take its place. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both read the rule this way. One of them calls it the principal reading. Another view says the whole is simply pronounced twice; scholars discuss this. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators record that view and prefer the substitution reading.

Example.

pacati "he cooks" → the whole pada pacati is the thing replaced

→ two word-forms, pacati and pacati, come in its place

→ pacati pacati "he cooks again and again" (the sense comes from SK 2140).

Applies when / blocked by. Why "of the whole"? Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both answer. Without sarvasya, in a form like vṛkṣābhyām only the base vṛkṣa would be doubled. With it, the whole word, ending and all, is replaced.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives two reasons why this is a heading and not a rule by itself. First, the rules after it name neither the operation nor the thing replaced, so they need it. Second, it is marked with the svarita accent, and a svarita-marked rule is a heading. The same commentator adds that what is carried forward is the heading's sense, "in place of the whole, two word-forms", not its bare wording. He cites SK 82 as evidence.

Watch out. "Two word-forms" does not mean two different words. The two forms are the same word. The second of them is the one SK 83 names āmreḍita.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

इत्यधिकृत्य ॥

Taking this as the heading (adhikāra) [the injunctions of doubling (dvirvacana) will be set out in order].

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 336

सर्वस्य द्वे ॥ सर्वशब्दस्य द्वे भवत इति विधिस्तु न शङ्खः । किं तु ‘नित्यवीप्सयोः’ इत्येवमादीनां विधेयकार्यिणोरनिदेशेन साकाङ्क्षत्वात्स्वरितत्वाच्चाधिकारोऽयं तदाह—इत्यधिकृत्येति । एतदर्थरूपमधिकृत्येत्यर्थः । स्वरूपग्रहणं तु न भवति ‘नाम्नेडितस्यान्त्यस्य तु वा’ इति लिङ्गात् । स्वरूपग्रहणे हि सति द्विरुक्तसर्वशब्दस्यैव परमाम्नेडितं स्यात् । न तु द्विरुक्तस्याव्यक्तानुकरणशब्दस्य परमिति ‘नाम्नेडितस्य’-इति पररूपनिषेधोऽन्त्यस्य तकारस्य विकल्पविधिश्च कथं संगच्छेत् ॥ ननु ‘नित्यवीप्सयोः’ इत्यादौ ‘पदस्य’ इति वक्ष्यमाणमपकृष्य पदस्यैव द्वित्वं विधीयते इति किमनेन सर्वस्येति ग्रहणेनेति चेत् । अत्राहुः । ‘स्वादिषु’ इति पदसंज्ञामादाय वृक्षाभ्यामित्यादौ प्रकृतिभागमात्रस्य द्विर्वचनं स्यात् । कृते तु ‘सर्वस्य’ इति ग्रहणे ‘सर्वशब्दोऽवयवकार्त्स्यं वर्तते’ इति ‘सर्वावयवोपेतस्य द्वित्वं, न तु कश्चिदवयवो वर्ज्यते’ इत्यर्थलाभादिष्टसिद्धिरिति ॥ इह ‘द्वे’ इत्यस्य संख्येयापेक्षायां शब्दरूपे गृह्येते । शब्दानुशासनप्रस्तावात् । ‘सर्वस्य’ इति स्थानषष्ठी ॥ सोऽयं स्थाने द्विर्वचनपक्षः ॥ यदि तु उच्चारणे संख्येये, तदा स्थान्यादेशभावो न संभवति, निवृत्तिधर्मा हि स्थानी भवति, सर्वं चेत् निवृत्तं कस्योच्चारणं स्यादतः ‘सर्वस्य’ इत्यध्याहतोच्चारणशब्दापेक्षया ‘कर्तृकर्मणोः कृति’ इति कर्मणि षष्ठी । ‘सर्वं द्विरुच्चारयेत्’ इति फलितोऽर्थः । सोऽयं ‘द्विःप्रयोगो द्विर्वचनम्’ इति पक्षः ॥ ननु आद्यपक्षे स्थानिवद्भावेन समुदायस्यैव पदत्वं स्यात् न त्वयवयोस्तंतश्च पदकार्याणि न स्युः । न चेष्टापत्तिः । ‘अपचन्नपचन्’ इत्यत्र डमुद्, ‘वृक्षान् वृक्षान्’ इत्यत्र ‘पदान्तस्य’ इति णत्वनिषेधः, ‘अग्रेऽग्रे’ इत्यत्र ‘एङः पदान्तात्’- इति पूर्वरूपत्वं च न सिध्येत् । किं चापदान्तत्वप्रयुक्तकार्याणि स्युः । तद्यथा ‘पयः पयः’ इत्यत्र ‘सोऽपदादौ’ इति सत्वं स्यात्, ‘पपीः पपीः’ इत्यत्र ‘इणः षः’ इति षत्वं स्यात् । पाशकरूपककाम्येषु’ इति वृत्तिप्रन्थमवष्टभ्य कथंचित्सत्वप्रत्यपरिहारेऽपि ‘अश्रीताश्रीत’ इत्यत्र ‘अतो गुणे’ इति पररूपं स्यादिति चेत् । अत्राहुः । यदि प्रत्यस्तमितावयवभेदः समुदाय एक एवादेशः स्यात् द्वे इति द्विवचनमनुपपन्नं स्यात्, अतो द्वे इति वचनादेकस्य पदस्य स्थाने द्वे पदे समुदिते युगपदादेशत्वेन विधीयेते तत्र स्थानिवद्भावेन समुदायस्य पदत्वं स्वत एव चावयवयोरपीति न कश्चिद्दोष इति ॥ स्यादेतत् । द्विःप्रयोगपक्षे प्रत्येकं पदसंज्ञायां सिद्धायामपि समुदायस्य न सिध्यति । ततश्च देवदत्तः पचतिपचतीत्यादौ ‘तिङ्ङतिङः’ इति सर्वस्य पदस्य निधातो न सिध्यतीति चेत् । अत्राहुः । पचतिपचतीत्यादौ हि स एव धातुः प्रत्ययश्चात्र द्विःपक्ष्यते । ततश्च यो यस्मात् प्रत्ययो विहितस्तदादितदन्तमिति विधीयमाना पदसंज्ञा समुदायस्यापि प्रवर्तते । तेनावग्रहादिः सिध्यतीति

Bālamanoramā

सर्वस्य द्वे - अथ द्विरुक्तप्रकरणम् । सर्वस्य द्वे । इत्यधिकृत्येति ।द्विर्वचनवधयोऽनुक्रंस्यन्ते॑ इति शेषः ।

translator notes

commentary BM: after 'ity adhikṛtya' the words 'the injunctions of doubling will be enumerated (dvirvacanavidhayo 'nukraṃsyante)' are to be supplied (śeṣa). Followed for the bracketed completion of k1.
commentary TB (sk.2139.t1): the sūtra is not an injunction that two [forms] come in place of the word sarva; since 'nityavīpsayoḥ' and the following name neither the operation nor the substituend they stand in expectancy, and since it is svarita-marked, this is an adhikāra, hence 'ity adhikṛtya', i.e. taking this meaning (artharūpa) as heading, not the word's own form, as 'nāmreḍitasyāntyasya tu vā' (A 6.1.99) shows. Followed for 'heading (adhikāra)' in k1 and for the non-literal 'the whole [word]' in sutra_en.
commentary TB (sk.2139.t1): 'dve' refers to two word-forms (śabdarūpe), since the context is instruction in words, and 'sarvasya' is a sixth case of place (sthānaṣaṣṭhī): this is the view that doubling is substitution (sthāne dvirvacana). If instead 'dve' counts utterances, 'sarvasya' is an object sixth case with 'uccāraṇa' understood, and the sense is 'one should pronounce the whole twice' (the view dviḥprayoga). TB also says 'sarvasya' is there so that the whole word with all its parts is doubled, not only the base in forms like vṛkṣābhyām. The English of sutra_en follows the sthāne reading, which TB (on SK 2140) calls the principal one; the dviḥprayoga view is Recorded.
commentary BM (on SK 2140): 'sarvasya' is a sixth case of place; 'dve' supplies the substitutes, with 'śabdarūpe' understood; without 'sarvasya', only the base part of forms like vṛkṣābhyām would be doubled. BM too prefers the substitution view to 'dve uccāraṇe staḥ'. Followed for 'In place of … two [word-forms]' and '[with all its parts]'.

SK 2140 · A 8.1.4V

नित्यवीप्सयोः ॥ २१४० ॥

nityavīpsayoḥ

nityavīpsayoḥ — [Two word-forms come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 — of a word (pada) — 'padasya' drawn back (apakṛṣṭa) from SK 401 —] when constancy (nitya, i.e. repetition) or pervasion (vīpsā) [is to be made manifest].

Rule. A pada is doubled when nitya or vīpsā is to be made manifest. Nitya here is repetition: Bhaṭṭoji calls it ābhīkṣṇya, "again and again". Vīpsā is the speaker's wish to convey pervasion: that something holds of every member of a set. By the heading, two word-forms come in place of the whole pada.

The sense is already in the word itself. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says the doubling only makes it manifest. The doubling is a signifier (dyotaka), not the bearer of the meaning.

Example.

Repetition:

pacati "he cooks" → doubled for repetition → pacati pacati "he cooks again and again".

bhuktvā "having eaten" → doubled for repetition → bhuktvā bhuktvā "having eaten again and again".

Pervasion:

vṛkṣam "tree" → doubled for pervasion → vṛkṣaṃ vṛkṣaṃ siñcati "he waters every tree".

grāmaḥ "village" → doubled for pervasion → grāmo grāmo ramaṇīyaḥ "every village is delightful".

Applies when / blocked by. Doubling for repetition is found in two kinds of words, Bhaṭṭoji says. They are words ending in a verb-ending (tiṅanta), like pacati, and kṛt forms that are avyaya, like bhuktvā. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators add that it is found only there. Both give the reason. Repetition belongs to the action, and the action is the principal thing only in these words.

The word padasya "of a pada" is drawn back into this rule from the later heading SK 401. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say so. One of them gives the purpose. The doubling for repetition must not apply to a bare root, and it must not block the affix yaṅ. Yaṅ is an affix added to a root that itself expresses repetition or intensity of the action. It is taught with the verbs, in the second half of the Kaumudī.

Watch out. "Every tree" does not mean every tree on earth. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say that the set is limited by context: the trees of this garden, which are being watered. Where nothing limits it, the set is unlimited. One of them cites jāto jāto nidhanam upaiti "every one who is born comes to his end". Note also that the doubled form stays singular. Each member is taken one by one, so no plural appears.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

आभीक्ष्ण्ये वीप्सायां च द्योत्ये पदस्य द्विर्वचनं स्यात् । आभीक्ष्ण्यं तिङन्तेष्वव्ययसंज्ञककृदन्तेषु च । पचति पचति । भुक्त्वा भुक्त्वा । वीप्सायाम् । वृक्षं वृक्षं सिञ्चति । ग्रामो ग्रामो रमणीयः ॥

When iteration (ābhīkṣṇya) or pervasion (vīpsā) is to be made manifest (dyotya), there is doubling (dvirvacana) of a word (pada) [i.e. two words come as its substitute]. [Doubling for] ābhīkṣṇya [takes place] in words ending in tiṅ and in words ending in a kṛt affix that bear the name avyaya: pacati pacati ('he cooks again and again'); bhuktvā bhuktvā ('having eaten again and again'). In [the sense of] vīpsā: vṛkṣaṃ vṛkṣaṃ siñcati ('he waters every tree'); grāmo grāmo ramaṇīyaḥ ('every village is delightful').

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 336–337

—नित्यवीप्सयोः । नित्यमिह पौनःपुन्यमित्याह—आभीक्ष्ण्य इति ॥—द्योत्य इति । ‘नपुंसकमनपुंसकेन’ इत्येकशेषः, एकवद्भावश्च वोध्यः ॥—पदस्येति । तेन नित्यतायां विधीयमानं द्विर्वचनं धातुमात्रस्य न भवति । किं च क्रियासमभिहारे धातोर्विहितो यङन्तरङ्गः, पदस्योच्चमानं द्विर्वचनं तु वहिरङ्गमिति यङं न वाधते । अन्यथा हि पौनःपुन्यं भृशार्थश्च क्रियासमभिहार इति भृशार्थं सावकाशोऽयं यङ् पौनःपुन्ये परेण द्विर्वचनेन वाध्येत । न च पदस्य द्विर्वचनाभ्युपगमे सगतिकस्य प्रपचति प्रपठतीत्यादेर्द्विर्वचनं न स्यादिति वाच्यम् । वार्तिककारवचनात्तत्सिद्धेः ॥ अत्र वदन्ति । सगतिकस्य द्वित्वे ऐकपद्यं नास्त्येव, स्थानिनः पदत्वाभावेन आदेशेऽपि तस्य दौर्लभ्यात् । द्विःप्रयोगपक्षे तु प्रथमगतिं विहायावशिष्टस्य समुदायस्य पदत्वं प्राप्तं तस्मिन् सत्यपि न क्षतिः ॥ वस्तुतस्त्विह स्थाने द्विर्व वनपक्ष एव मुख्यः । स्थानिनः सुवन्तत्वेनादेशस्यापि सुवन्तलात्सुवन्तात्तद्धित इति पक्षे समुदायात् व्यञ्छयोः संभवेन पौनःपुन्यं पौनःपुनिक इति रूपसिद्धेः । ‘प्रातिपदिकात्तद्धितः’ इति पक्षाभ्युपगमेऽपि श्रूयमाणप्रलयान्तस्यैव प्रातिपदिकल-निषेधात्पुनरिलस्यैव प्रातिपदिकत्वेनादेशस्यापि प्रातिपदिकलात्पौनःपुन्यमिलादि सिध्यत्येव ॥ द्विःप्रयोगपक्षे लन्तरङ्गलाद-व्ययात्सुपो लुकि द्वित्वं प्रवर्तत इति समुदायस्य सुवन्तलाभावात् प्रातिपदिकलाभावाच्च व्यञ्छयौ नच भवतः । न च ‘अर्थ-वदधातुः—’ इत्यादिना समुदायस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वे सोक्ष्टपत्तौ तस्य लुकि च सुवन्तत्वं प्रातिपदिकत्वं च संभवत्येवेति वाच्यम् । ‘यत्र संघाते पूर्वो भागः पदं तस्य चेद्भवति समासस्यैव’ इति नियमेन प्रातिपदिकलस्यासंभवेन सुवन्तलस्याप्यसंभ-वात् । न च द्विःप्रयोगपक्षे स एव धातुः प्रलयश्च द्विःप्रव्यत इति समुदायस्यापि पदसंज्ञा प्रवर्तते इत्यधुनैवोक्तलात्पुनःपुनरिति समुदायस्य सुवन्तलमस्त्येवेति शङ्काम् । अन्तरङ्गलात्सोलुकि प्रकृतिभागस्य द्विर्वचने सति यस्मात्प्रलयो विहितस्तदादि तद-न्तमिति विधीयमानायाः पदसंज्ञायाः समुदायस्य दुर्लभलात् । ततश्चैकपद्याभावे ‘पुनःपुनर्जायमाना पुराणी’ इत्यादाववप्र-होऽपि न सिध्येदिति ॥—आभीक्ष्ण्यमिति । तद्धि क्रियानिष्ठधर्मः । तेन तत्क्षोतनार्थं द्वित्वं क्रियाप्रधानानामेव न्या-य्यम् । क्रियाप्राधान्यं चाख्यातेऽस्ति, कृद्विशेषे च ‘अव्ययकृतो भावे’ इति वक्ष्यमाणलादिति भावः । केचित्तु क्रियाप्रधा-नानामेव द्वित्वे परिगृहीतसाधनाया एव क्रियायाः व्यवहारोपयोगिलात्तदभिधानाच्च धातुमात्रस्य द्वित्वं न भवति किं तु तादृशक्रियाभिधायिनः पदस्यैव स्यादिति पदस्यापकर्षणाभावेऽपि न क्षतिरिलाहुः । तच्चिन्त्यम् । उक्तरीत्या नानाकारक-विशिष्टक्रियासमर्थकस्य वाक्यस्यैव द्विलापत्तेः । किं च भावार्थकलकारान्तानामव्ययकृतां च भवदुक्तरीत्या द्वित्वं न स्यात् ॥ ननु तत्र नित्यतावगलनन्तरं पदान्तरैः साधनाकाङ्क्षा परिपूर्यत इति भूयते पक्तेलादिपदानां द्वित्वं स्यादेवेति चेत् । तर्हि तत्रैव धातुमात्रस्य द्वित्वं केन वार्यताम् । किं च तद्वदेव कर्तृकर्मलकारस्थलेऽपि धातुमात्रद्वित्वं दुर्वारमिति पदत्येलपक-षणमावश्यकमेवेति दिक् ॥—वीप्सायामिति । व्याप्तुमिच्छा वीप्सा । व्याप्तिप्रतिपिपादयियेति यावत् । सा च प्रयोक्तुर्वन्मे-आवाधवत् । ‘गतगता’ इत्युक्ते प्रियस्य चिरगमनादिना पीडितो वाक्यं प्रयुङ्क्ते इति यथा प्रतीयते तथा वृक्षंवृक्षं सिध्वती-त्यादावपि व्याप्तिं बुबोधयिषोरिदं वाक्यमित्यवगमात् ॥ शाब्दबोधविषयस्तु व्याप्तिरेव । तथाच ‘नित्यव्याप्त्योः’ इत्येव सूत्रयितुं शक्यम् । व्याप्तिरिह कार्त्कर्यं तच्चाधिकारिकम् । ‘सर्वे ब्राह्मणा आमन्त्रिताः’ इत्यादौ यथा । ‘न हि जगतीतले विद्यमाना ब्राह्मणाः सर्वेऽपि केनचिदामन्त्रयितुं शक्यन्ते’ इति स्वप्रामस्थस्वजातीयब्राह्मणपरतया यत्र संकोचो यद्यन्दुर्पदेते तर्ह्यत्रापि सकलवृक्षसेचनसामर्थ्यं कस्यापि मनुष्यस्य नास्तीति यत्र वाटिकादौ वृक्षसेचनार्थमधिकारलद्वाटिकास्यवृक्षाणामेव कार्त्कर्यं वृक्षंवृक्षं सिध्वतीत्यादौ गम्यते इत्यभ्युपेयम् ॥ यत्र तु संकोचे कारणं नास्ति, तत्रासंकोच इष्ट एव ‘जातोजातो निधनमुपैति’ इति यथा ॥ न चैवं वृक्षंवृक्षमित्यादौ बहुवचनप्रसङ्गः । बहूनां भानेऽपि बहुलसंख्यायास्तत्राभानात् । प्रत्ये-कनिष्ठमेकलमेव हि तत्र भासते इत्यादि मनोरमायां स्थितम् ॥ वृक्षंवृक्षमिति समुदायस्य तु प्रातिपदिकलाभावाद्बहुवचनस्य प्रसङ्ग एव नास्ति । न च ‘अर्थवदधातुः—’ इत्यनेन प्रातिपदिकत्वं शङ्काम् । ‘यत्र संघाते पूर्वो भागः पदं तस्य चेद्भवति समासस्यैव’ इति नियमात् । न चाष्टमिकं द्विर्वचनमादेशरूपमिति संघातो न भवतीत्यपि शङ्काम् । द्वे इति वचनादेकस्य पदस्य स्थाने द्वे पदे समुदिते युगपदादेशत्वेन विधीयेते इति प्रायुक्तलात् ॥ नन्वेवमपि ‘सरित्सरित्’ ‘योषायोषा’ इत्यादौ बहुवचनोत्पत्तिर्दुर्बारैव । सरिदिति स्थानिनः प्रातिपदिकलसंभवेन तदादेशस्यापि सरित्सरिदित्यादेः स्थानिवद्भावेन प्राति-पदिकलसंभवादिति चेत् । अत्राहुः । अन्तरङ्गैकसंख्यावरुद्धो द्विरुक्तार्थः संख्यान्तरे निराकाङ्क्ष एव । न हि वस्तुगत्या बहुलमस्तीत्येतावतैव तस्य शाब्दबोध आपादयितुं शक्यते । असत्त्वार्थकेष्वपि तदापत्तेः । न हि शयनबाहुल्याभिप्रायेण ‘देवदत्तेन शय्यते’ इति भावे कश्चित्प्रयुङ्क्ते ॥ तत्रायोग्यं तदिति चेत् । समं प्रकृतेऽपि । अत्र च लिङ्गम् ‘एकैकस्य प्राचाम्’ इति निर्देश इति

Bālamanoramā

नित्यवीप्सयोः - नित्यवीप्सयोः । नित्यशब्देन नित्यत्वं विवक्षितम् । तश्च आभीण्यमिति भाष्यम् । व्याप्तुमिच्छा वीप्सा=व्याप्तिप्रतिपादनेच्छा । सा च प्रयोक्तृधर्मः । व्याप्तिरेव तु शाब्दबोधविषय इति भाष्यस्वरसः । तथा चनित्यव्याप्त्या॑रित्येव सुवचनम् । व्याप्तिश्च कात्स्र्यन्येन संबन्धः, उपसर्गबलात् । पदस्येत्यधिकरिष्यमाणमिहापकृष्यते ।सर्वस्ये॑ति स्थानषष्ठी । 'द्वे' इति त्वादेशसमर्पकम् । तस्य च 'शब्दरूपे' इति विशेष्यमर्थाल्लभ्यते, शब्दानुशासनप्रस्तावात् । ते च शब्दरूपे स्वरूपतोऽतश्चान्तरतमे पदे इति स्थानेऽन्तरतमपरिभाषया लभ्यते । ततश्च पौनःपुन्ये कार्त्स्न्ये च गम्ये कृत्स्नावयवविशिष्टस्य पदस्याऽर्थतश्च शब्दतश्चान्तरतमे द्वे पदे भवत इति फलितम् । तदभिप्रेत्याह — आभीक्ष्ण्ये वीप्साया च द्योत्ये इति । द्योत्यं च द्योत्या च द्योत्यम् । तस्मिन्नित्यर्थः ।नपुंसकमनपुंसकेनैकवच्चास्यान्यतरस्या॑मिति नपुंसकैकशेषः । एकत्वं च नित्यवीप्से च प्रकृतिगम्ये । द्विर्वचनं तु द्योतकम् । सत्यपि प्रकृतेर्द्वित्वे द्विरुक्तयोः प्रकृत्यनतिरेकादिति बोध्यम् । द्विर्वचनं स्यादिति । द्वे पदे आदेशौ स्त इत्यर्थः । तत्रावयवयोः पदत्वं स्वतः सिद्धम् । समुदायस्य तु पदद्वयात्मकस्य स्थानिवत्त्वात्सुबन्तत्वम् । तेनअपचन्नपचन्नि॑त्यत्र ङमुट्,वृक्षान्वृक्षा॑नित्यत्रपदान्तस्ये॑ति णत्वनिषेधः, 'अग्रेऽग्रे' इत्यत्रएङः पदान्ता॑दिति पूर्वरूपं चेत्यादीन्यवयवानां पदकार्याणि सिध्यन्ति ।पुनःपुन॑रिति समुदायस्य स्थानिवत्त्वेन सुबन्तत्वाद्भावे ष्यञि, भवे ठञि च पौनः पुन्यम्, पौनःपुनिक इति च सिध्यति । 'द्वे उच्चारणे स्त' इत्याश्रयणे तु सर्वं पदं द्विरुच्चारयेदित्यर्थः फलितः स्यात् । ततश्च पुनरित्येकस्यैव द्विरुच्चार्यमाणस्य पुनःपुनरित्यादेशत्वाऽभावेन स्थानिवत्त्वाऽप्रसक्त्या सुबन्तत्वविरहात्तद्दितोत्पत्तिर्न स्यात् । तस्मादादेशपक्ष एव श्रेयानित्यास्तां तावत् । आभीक्ष्ण्यं तिङन्तेष्विति । आक्षीक्ष्ण्यं-पौनः पुन्यम् । तच्चैह प्रधानभूतक्रियाया एव । क्रियाप्राधान्यं चाख्यातेष्वस्तीतिप्रशंसायां रूप॑विति सूत्रे भाष्ये स्पष्टम् । अव्ययकृत्स्वपि क्त्त्वातुमुन्नादिषु क्रियाप्राधान्यम्, 'अव्ययकृतो भावे' इत्युक्तेः तथा च तिङन्तेष्वव्ययसंज्ञककृदन्तेषु च पौनःपुन्यनिमित्तकद्विर्वचनं नान्यत्रेत्यर्थः । तथैवोदाहरति — पचति पचति भुक्त्वा भुक्त्वेति । वीप्सायामिति । 'उदाह्यियते' इति शेषः । वृक्षं वृक्षमिति । कृत्स्नं वृक्षमित्यर्थः । अत्र प्रकृततद्वाटिकागतवृक्षकार्त्स्न्यंगम्यते, जगतीतलस्थितकृत्स्नवृक्षसेचनस्याऽशक्यत्वात् । सर्वशब्दस्य कार्त्स्न्यवाचित्वेऽपि न द्वित्वमित्यनुपदमेव 'यथास्वे' इत्यत्र वक्ष्यते । वृक्षं-वृक्षमित्यत्र कार्त्स्न्यावगमेऽपि प्रत्येकनिषठमेकत्वमेव भासते, नतु बहुत्वम्, अतो न बहुवचनम्,एकैकस्य प्राचा॑मिति लिङ्गाच्च ।सर्वस्ये॑त्यभावे वृक्षाभ्यामित्यादौ 'स्वादिषु' इति पदत्वमवलम्ब्य प्रकृतिभागमात्रस्य द्विर्वचनं स्यात् । कृते तु सर्वग्रहणे पदावयवत्वानाक्रान्तस्यैव कृत्स्नावयवोपेतस्य पदस्य द्वित्वमित्यर्थलाभान्न दोषः । पदस्येति किम् । वाक्यस्य मा भूत् ।

translator notes

commentary BM: by 'nitya' constancy (nityatva) is meant, and the Bhāṣya says this is ābhīkṣṇya; vīpsā, 'the wish to pervade', is the speaker's wish to convey pervasion (vyāpti), and pervasion (relation to totality, kārtsnya) is what the sentence conveys. 'padasya', which is to be made an adhikāra later, is drawn back (apakṛṣyate) here. Followed for the gloss of nitya and for the bracketed 'padasya' in sutra_en.
translator BM names no source rule for 'padasya'; identifying the later adhikāra as 'padasya' (SK 401) is the translator's.
commentary TB: 'nitya' here is repetition (paunaḥpunya); 'padasya' is drawn back so that doubling for constancy does not apply to a bare root (dhātu) and does not block yaṅ, which is antaraṅga. TB rejects the view of 'some' that the apakarṣa of 'padasya' is unnecessary. Followed for 'of a word (pada)'.
commentary BM: 'dyotye' is neuter singular by the ekaśeṣa of 'napuṃsakam anapuṃsakenaikavac cāsyānyatarasyām' (dyotyaṃ ca dyotyā ca), so it covers both ābhīkṣṇya and vīpsā; the sense is conveyed by the base, and the doubling only makes it manifest (dyotaka). 'dvirvacanaṃ syāt' means that two words come as substitutes (dve pade ādeśau staḥ). Followed for 'is to be made manifest (dyotya)', for its reference to both senses, and for the bracketed gloss on doubling.
commentary BM: ābhīkṣṇya (= paunaḥpunya) belongs to the principal action; action is principal in finite forms and in avyaya-kṛts such as ktvā and tumun ('avyayakṛto bhāve'), so doubling for repetition occurs in words ending in tiṅ and in avyaya-kṛdantas and not elsewhere. Followed for the bracketed '[Doubling for] … [takes place]'.
commentary BM: vṛkṣaṃ vṛkṣam means 'the whole [set of] trees', i.e. those of the garden in question, since one cannot water every tree on earth; though totality is understood, singularity residing in each is what appears, so there is no plural ('ekaikasya prācām' is the evidence). Recorded; the English 'every tree' keeps the singular.
commentary TB: 'dyotye' is by the ekaśeṣa of 'napuṃsakam anapuṃsakena…' with singular treatment. ābhīkṣṇya is a property residing in the action, so doubling to make it manifest suits only words in which action is principal: finite forms, and the particular kṛts covered by 'avyayakṛto bhāve'. vīpsā is the speaker's wish to convey pervasion, while pervasion (totality) is what the sentence conveys, and that totality is restricted by context (the trees of the garden being watered), unless nothing restricts it, as in 'jāto jāto nidhanam upaiti'. Followed for 'is to be made manifest' covering both senses and for the bracketed '[Doubling for] … [takes place]'.

SK 2141 · A 8.1.5V

परेर्वर्जने ॥ २१४१ ॥

parervarjane

parer varjane — [Two word-forms come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 —] of pari when [it is used in the sense of] exclusion (varjana).

Rule. Pari is doubled when it is used in the sense of exclusion (varjana), "except". By the heading, two word-forms come in place of the whole.

Example.

pari vaṅgebhyo vṛṣṭo devaḥ → pari in the sense "except" is doubled

→ pari pari vaṅgebhyo vṛṣṭo devaḥ "the rain-god has rained, except on the Vaṅgas".

Bhaṭṭoji glosses it: "leaving out (parihṛtya) the Vaṅgas". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators supplies the rain-god (parjanya) as the subject of vṛṣṭaḥ.

Applies when / blocked by. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both explain the grammar of the example. Pari is a karmapravacanīya in the sense "except" by SK 596. So vaṅgebhyaḥ takes the fifth case by SK 598.

A vārttika follows: parer varjane vāvacanam, "for pari in the sense of exclusion, the doubling is to be stated as optional". So pari vaṅgebhyaḥ, undoubled, is also correct.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators adds another condition, "not in a compound". So there is no doubling in the compound paritrigartaṃ vṛṣṭo devaḥ "it has rained except on Trigarta". Scholars discuss the exact wording of this vārttika.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

परि परि वङ्गेभ्यो वृष्टो देवः । वङ्गान्परिहृत्येत्यर्थः ॥

pari pari vaṅgebhyo vṛṣṭo devaḥ ('the god [of rain] has rained except on the Vaṅgas'); the meaning is 'leaving out (parihṛtya) the Vaṅgas'.

vārttika

परेर्वर्जने वावचनम्

(vārttika) For pari in [the sense of] exclusion (varjana), [doubling] is to be stated as optional (vā).

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ परि वङ्गेभ्यः ॥

pari vaṅgebhyaḥ [without doubling].

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 337

—परेर्न्रजैने । अत्र वार्तिकं ‘परेर्वर्जनेऽसमासे’ । नेह परित्रिगर्त वृष्टो देवः ॥ ‘वेति च वक्तव्यम्’ ॥ तथा च अप हरेः परि हरेः संसार इति कारकेषूदाहतम् ॥—परिपरि वङ्गेभ्य इति । ‘अपपरी वर्जने’ इति कर्मप्रवच-नीयसंज्ञायां ‘पञ्चम्यपाङ्परिभिः’ इति पञ्चमी

Bālamanoramā

परेर्वर्जने - परेर्वर्जने । वर्जने वर्तमानस्य परीत्यस्य द्वे स्त इत्यर्थः । परि परि वङ्गेभ्यो वृष्ट इति । 'पर्जन्य' इति शेषः । 'अपपरी वर्जने' इति परिः कर्मप्रवचनीयः ।पञ्चम्यपाङ्परिभि॑रिति पञ्चमी । 'परि हरेः संसारः' इत्यत्र तुपरेरसमासे इति वक्तव्य॑मिति वार्तिकान्नद्विर्वचनम् ।

translator notes

commentary BM: the sense is that two [word-forms] come for pari when it occurs in the sense of exclusion (varjane vartamānasya … dve staḥ). Followed for sutra_en.
commentary BM: with 'vṛṣṭaḥ' the word 'parjanya' (the rain-god) is to be supplied; pari is a karmapravacanīya by 'apaparī varjane' (A 1.4.88), and the fifth case [of vaṅgebhyaḥ] is by 'pañcamy apāṅparibhiḥ' (A 2.3.10). Followed for 'the god [of rain]'.
commentary TB: the vārttika [on this sūtra] is 'parer varjane 'samāse', so there is no doubling in paritrigartaṃ vṛṣṭo devaḥ; and 'vā' too is to be stated, hence the kāraka section's example apa hareḥ, pari hareḥ saṃsāraḥ. On pari pari vaṅgebhyaḥ TB gives the karmapravacanīya status by 'apaparī varjane' and the fifth case by 'pañcamy apāṅparibhiḥ'. Recorded.
commentary BM: in pari hareḥ saṃsāraḥ there is no doubling because of the vārttika, which BM's text quotes as 'parer asamāse iti vaktavyam'. The quotation as transmitted does not contain 'vā', which is what the kaumudī's vārttika turns on. Recorded, not emended.
textual The digital source opens k3 with the editorial tag '(vārttikam)' and a double daṇḍa, closing the vārttika in k2. NSP p. 337 (scan) prints the vārttika sign before 'parer varjane vāvacanam' and then 'pari vaṅgebhyaḥ' as Bhaṭṭoji's counter-example. The tag is left untranslated. The p43 scan collation (batch19) reports SK 2141 clean.

SK 2142 · A 8.1.7V

उपर्यध्यधसः सामीप्ये ॥ २१४२ ॥

uparyadhyadhasaḥ sāmīpye

uparyadhyadhasaḥ sāmīpye — [Two word-forms come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 —] of upari, adhi and adhas when proximity (sāmīpya) [is to be understood].

Rule. Upari "above", adhi "over" and adhas "below" are doubled when proximity (sāmīpya), nearness, is to be understood.

Example.

upari grāmam → upari in the sense "close above" is doubled

→ uparyupari grāmam "in the region close above the village".

adhaḥ lokam → adhas in the sense "close below" is doubled

→ adho 'dho lokam "in the region close below the world".

adhi sukham → adhi in the sense "close upon" is doubled

→ adhyadhi sukham "sorrow at a time close upon happiness".

Applies when / blocked by. The nearness may be in space or in time. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say that uparyupari grāmam and adho 'dho lokam show space, and adhyadhi sukham shows time.

Why "when nearness is meant"? One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators answers. In upari candramāḥ "the moon is above", only the relation of higher and lower is meant. The same holds in upari śiraso ghaṭaṃ dhārayati "he holds a pot above his head". So there is no doubling.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

उपर्युपरि ग्रामम् । ग्रामस्योपरिष्टात्समीपे देशे इत्यर्थः । अध्यधि सुखम् । सुखस्योपरिष्टात्समीपकाले दुःखमित्यर्थः । अधोऽधो लोकम् । लोकस्याधस्तात्समीपे देशे इत्यर्थः ॥

uparyupari grāmam: the meaning is 'in the region close above the village'. adhyadhi sukham: the meaning is 'sorrow at a time close upon (upariṣṭāt) happiness'. adho 'dho lokam: the meaning is 'in the region close below the world'.

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 337–338

—उपर्यध्य—। सामीप्यं प्रत्यासत्तिः । तच्च कालकृतं देशकृतं वा ॥—अध्यधि सुखमिति । कालकृतस्योदाहरणमिदम् ॥ सामीप्य इति किम् । उपरि चन्द्रमाः उपरि शिरसो घटं धारण-तीत्यत्र तु वस्तुतो विद्यमानमपि सामीप्यं न विवक्षितं, किं त्वौतराधर्यमेव केवलं विवक्षितमिति द्विर्वचनं न भवति ॥ विवक्षा हि अब्दव्युत्पत्तेः प्रभावं कारणम् । अत्र च ‘उपप्रोपक्रमं तदाद्याचिख्यासायाम्’ इति सन्नन्तप्रयोगो शापक इत्याहुः ॥—वाक्यादेः—

Bālamanoramā

उपर्यध्यधसः सामीप्ये - उपर्यध्यधसः । उपरि, अधि, अधः एतेषां द्वे स्तः सामीप्ये गम्ये इत्यर्थः । सामीप्यं च उपर्युपरि ग्राममित्यत्र अधोऽधो लोकमित्यत्र च देशतः, अध्यधि सुखमित्यत्र तुकालत इति ज्ञेयम् ।

translator notes

commentary BM: two [word-forms] come for upari, adhi and adhas when proximity is understood (sāmīpye gamye); the proximity is spatial in uparyupari grāmam and adho 'dho lokam, temporal in adhyadhi sukham. Followed for '[is to be understood]' in sutra_en and for the temporal reading of upariṣṭāt in k1.
commentary TB: sāmīpya is nearness (pratyāsatti), made by time or by place; adhyadhi sukham is the example of the temporal kind. Why 'sāmīpye'? In upari candramāḥ and upari śiraso ghaṭaṃ dhārayati the nearness that exists in fact is not what is meant, only the relation of higher and lower, so there is no doubling. Recorded; consistent with the English.

SK 2143 · A 8.1.8V

वाक्यादेरामन्त्रितस्यासूयासम्मतिकोपकुत्सनभर्त्सनेषु ॥ २१४३ ॥

vākyāderāmantritasyāsūyāsammatikopakutsanabhartsaneṣu

vākyāder āmantritasyāsūyāsammatikopakutsanabhartsaneṣu — [Two word-forms come ('dve staḥ', supplied (śeṣa)) in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 —] of an addressed form (āmantrita) standing at the beginning of a sentence (vākyādi), in [the senses of] envy (asūyā), approval (sammati), anger (kopa), censure (kutsana) and threat (bhartsana).

Rule. A word of address (āmantrita) that stands at the beginning of a sentence is doubled in five senses. They are envy (asūyā), approval (sammati), anger (kopa), censure (kutsana) and threat (bhartsana). By the heading, two word-forms come in place of the whole. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators supplies the words "two come" to complete the sūtra.

Example.

Envy: sundara "handsome one" → doubled → sundara sundara vṛthā te saundaryam "Handsome one, handsome one! Your beauty is worthless." One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says it is said by one who cannot bear another's beauty.

Approval: deva "lord" → doubled → deva deva vandyo 'si "Lord, lord! You are worthy of worship."

Anger: durvinīta "insolent one" → doubled → durvinīta durvinīta idānīṃ jñāsyasi "Insolent one, insolent one! Now you will know." One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators supplies what he will know: the fruit of his insolence.

Censure: dhānuṣka "archer" → doubled → dhānuṣka dhānuṣka vṛthā te dhanuḥ "Archer, archer! Your bow is worthless." One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says it reproaches one unfit for battle.

Threat: cora "thief" → doubled → cora cora ghātayiṣyāmi tvām "Thief, thief! I shall have you killed."

Applies when / blocked by. Threat usually comes from anger, and censure from envy. Why are they named apart? Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both answer. A teacher threatens a pupil without anger, and censures him without envy, wishing him well.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators adds that the accent rules for an āmreḍita apply to these examples. They are svaritam āmreḍite… (SK 3622) and āmreḍitaṃ bhartsane (SK 3614), both in the accent section. He also notes that pluti is optional here and so not shown. Pluti is protraction of a vowel to three mātrās.

Watch out. The word of address must open the sentence. The doubling is for these five senses only.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

असूयायाम् । सुन्दर सुन्दर वृथा ते सौन्दर्यम् । सम्मतौ, देव देव वन्द्योऽसि । कोपे, दुर्विनीत दुर्विनीत इदानीं ज्ञास्यसि । कुत्सने, धानुष्क धानुष्क वृथा ते धनुः, भर्त्सने चोर चोर घातयिष्यामि त्वाम् ॥

In envy (asūyā): sundara sundara vṛthā te saundaryam ('Handsome one, handsome one! Your beauty is worthless'). In approval (sammati): deva deva vandyo 'si ('Lord, lord! You are worthy of worship'). In anger (kopa): durvinīta durvinīta idānīṃ jñāsyasi ('Insolent one, insolent one! Now you will know [the fruit of your insolence]'). In censure (kutsana): dhānuṣka dhānuṣka vṛthā te dhanuḥ ('Archer, archer! Your bow is worthless'). In threat (bhartsana): cora cora ghātayiṣyāmi tvām ('Thief, thief! I shall have you killed').

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 338

—सुन्दरसुन्दरेत्यादि । ‘स्वरितमाम्नेडितेऽसूयासंमतिकोपकुत्सनेषु’ ‘आम्नेडितं भर्त्सने’ इति सूत्राभ्यां यथायथं प्राप्तः ॥ युतो वैकल्पिकलान्नेह कृतः । उक्तं हि प्राक् ‘सर्वः ॥ युतो वैकल्पिकः’ इति ॥ नन्वत्र कोपासूयाभ्यां पृथक्कुत्सनभर्त्सनप्रहणमपार्थकम् । न ह्यसूयां विना कुत्सयते, न वा अकुपितो भर्त्सयत इति चेत् । अत्राहुः । गुरवो हि हितैषिलादकुपिता अपि भर्त्सनं कुर्वते, विनाप्यसूयां कुत्सां कुर्वन्तीति पृथक्तया निर्देशः सूत्रकारेण कृतः । ‘सामृतैः पाणिभिर्घ्रन्ति गुरवो न विषोक्षितैः । लालनाश्रयिणो दोषास्ताडनाश्रयिणो गुणाः’ इति

Bālamanoramā

वाक्यादेरामन्त्रितस्यासूयासम्मतिकोपकुत्सनभर्त्सनेषु - वाक्यादेः । 'द्वे स्त' इति शेषः । यद्यपि कोपाद्भत्र्सनम्, असूयया कुत्सनं, तथापि विनापि कोपाऽसूये भत्र्सनकुत्सनयोः शिष्यादौ संभवात्पृथग्ग्रहणमिति भाष्ये स्पष्टम् । सुन्दरेति । सोन्दर्यमसहमानस्येदं वाक्यम् । देवेति । तव वन्दनं सम्मतिमित्यर्थः । दुर्विनीतेति । क्रोधाविष्टस्य वाक्यम् । ज्ञास्यसीति ।दुर्विनयस्य फल॑मिति शेषः । धानुष्केति । युद्धाऽसमर्थं प्रति निन्देयम् । चोरेति । चोरं प्रति अवाच्यवादोऽयम् ।

translator notes

commentary BM: 'dve staḥ' is to be supplied (śeṣa). Though threat arises from anger and censure from envy, threat and censure are mentioned separately because they occur without anger or envy, e.g. towards a pupil, as the Bhāṣya makes clear. Followed for the bracketed supplement in sutra_en; the reason for the separate mention is Recorded.
commentary BM: sundara sundara is said by one who cannot bear [another's] beauty; deva deva means 'your worship is approved'; durvinīta durvinīta is the utterance of one seized by anger, and with jñāsyasi 'the fruit of your misconduct (durvinayasya phalam)' is to be supplied; dhānuṣka dhānuṣka is reproach of one unfit for battle; cora cora is abuse of a thief. Followed for the bracketed '[the fruit of your insolence]'.
commentary TB: in these examples 'svaritam āmreḍite 'sūyāsaṃmatikopakutsaneṣu' (A 8.2.103) and 'āmreḍitaṃ bhartsane' (A 8.2.95) apply as appropriate; pluti, being optional, is not shown here. TB also asks why kutsana and bhartsana are named apart from kopa and asūyā, and answers that teachers, wishing [the pupil's] good, threaten without anger and censure without envy. Recorded; the English writes the examples without pluti, as the source does.

SK 2144 · A 8.1.9बहुव्रीहिवदतिदेशः

एकं बहुव्रीहिवत् ॥ २१४४ ॥

ekaṃ bahuvrīhivat

ekaṃ bahuvrīhivat — [The word] eka [when it has been doubled — 'dve' carried forward (anuvṛtti) from SK 2139 —] is [treated] like a bahuvrīhi.

Rule. The word eka "one", once doubled, is treated like a bahuvrīhi (bahuvrīhivat). Bhaṭṭoji names the result: deletion of the case-ending (sublopa) and treatment as masculine (puṃvadbhāva).

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says the word dve "two" is carried forward. That is why Bhaṭṭoji writes "eka, when doubled". The other says, following the Bhāṣya, that this rule concerns only doubling for pervasion. The Bhāṣya is Patañjali's great commentary on the Aṣṭādhyāyī.

Example.

ekam ekam "one, one" (eka doubled for pervasion)

→ the whole pair is one prātipadika, because it is treated like a bahuvrīhi

→ the case-endings of both halves are deleted by luk → eka eka

→ the two halves join: a + e gives ai (vowel sandhi, chapter 3) → ekaika

→ one case-ending is added after the whole → ekaikam akṣaram "each single syllable".

Bhaṭṭoji gives the stem status, the deletion and the new ending. He leaves the vowel sandhi unstated.

The order matters. The pair first becomes a prātipadika. Only then can the endings be deleted, and only then can a new ending come after the whole. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says the phrase "because it is a prātipadika" governs both steps, like a gem set in the middle of a string. Without the transfer, the pair would not be a prātipadika, and there could be no deletion. The other commentator adds that the new ending is singular only.

ekayā ekayā (feminine, third case; these steps are given by one of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators)

→ one prātipadika; both endings deleted

→ the first half is made masculine, ekā → eka

→ the third case again after the whole → ekaikayā āhutyā "with each single oblation".

Applies when / blocked by. In ekaikayā the masculine treatment of the first half changes nothing you can hear. The form is ekaikayā either way. Bhaṭṭoji says the difference shows in the avagraha. The avagraha is the division of a word into its parts in the pada-text, the word-by-word recitation of a Vedic text. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say it is eka-ekayā, not ekā-ekayā. One of them notes that the Taittirīya tradition divides it ekā ekayā.

Does the transferred bahuvrīhi lose the name sarvanāman? SK 222, na bahuvrīhau, withholds that name in a bahuvrīhi. Bhaṭṭoji reports the earlier authorities (prāñcaḥ). They said the word "bahuvrīhi" in SK 222 means the principal bahuvrīhi only. So a transferred bahuvrīhi keeps the name sarvanāman.

Bhaṭṭoji then gives his own view in two steps. In reality, the Bhāṣya rejects SK 222 altogether. And even if the sūtra is kept, it forbids the name only in the alaukika vigraha. That is the technical analysis made while the compound is being formed. It does not forbid the name in the finished bahuvrīhi. So the question does not even arise here.

ekaikasmai dehi "give to each one". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators explains. After both endings are deleted, the whole ends in eka, a word of the sarva-list. So the fourth-case ending ṅe is replaced by smai (SK 215).

Why does the sūtra say "bahuvrīhi" and not simply "compound"? Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both point to the accent. The transfer brings the accent of a bahuvrīhi, where the first member keeps its own accent (SK 3735, in the accent section).

Watch out. Only the first half becomes masculine. The second half keeps its feminine ending: eka-ekayā. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives the reason. The masculine treatment of SK 831 needs a following word that refers to the same thing. Only the first half has such a word after it.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

द्विरुक्तः एकशब्दो बहुव्रीहिवत्स्यात् । तेन सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावौ । एकैकमक्षरम् । इह द्वयोरपि सुपोर्लुकि कृते बहुव्रीहिवद्भावादेव प्रातिपदिकत्वात्समुदायात्सुप् । एकैकया आहुत्या । इह पूर्वभागे पुंवद्भावादवग्रहे विशेषः । 'न बहुव्रीहौ' SK 222 इत्यत्र पुनर्बहुव्रीहिग्रहणं मुख्यबहुव्रीहिलाभार्थम् । तेनातिदिष्टबहुव्रीहौ सर्वनामतास्त्येवेति प्राञ्चः । वस्तुतस्तु भाष्यमते प्रत्याख्यातमेतत् । सूत्रमतेऽपि बहुव्रीह्यर्थेऽलौकिके विग्रहे निषेधकं न तु बहुव्रीहावितीहातिदेशशङ्कैव नास्ति । एकैकस्मै देहि ॥

The word eka, when doubled, is [treated] like a bahuvrīhi (bahuvrīhivat). Hence deletion of sup (sublopa) and treatment as masculine (puṃvadbhāva).

ekaikam akṣaram ('each single syllable'). Here, because the whole (samudāya) is a prātipadika precisely by its being treated like a bahuvrīhi, luk of both sup affixes is done and a sup [comes] after the whole: [ekam ekam] (the whole a prātipadika by bahuvrīhivad-bhāva) → luk of both sup affixes → sup after the whole → ekaikam.

ekaikayā āhutyā ('with each single oblation'). Here, because of the treatment as masculine in the first part, there is a difference in the avagraha [the division of the word in the pada-text: it is eka-ekayā, not ekā-ekayā].

The repeated mention of bahuvrīhi in 'na bahuvrīhau' (SK 222) is for the sake of taking the principal (mukhya) bahuvrīhi; hence in an extended (atidiṣṭa) bahuvrīhi the status of sarvanāman does remain — so say the earlier authorities (prāñcaḥ). In reality, however, on the view of the Bhāṣya this [sūtra] is rejected (pratyākhyāta). And even on the view [that keeps] the sūtra, it prohibits [sarvanāman status] in the unworldly (alaukika) analytic statement (vigraha) having the sense of a bahuvrīhi, not in a bahuvrīhi; so here there is no ground even for the doubt [arising] from the extension. ekaikasmai dehi ('give to each one').

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 338

—एकं वहुव्रीहिवत् । द्वे इत्यनुवर्तते । तच्चानुवाद्यसमर्पकं, तदाह—द्विरुक्त इति ॥—तेनेति । यद्यप्येतौ वहुव्रीहौ विशिष्य न विहितौ, तथापि तत्र दृष्टावित्येतावतैवातिदिश्येते इति भावः ॥—सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावाविति । पूर्वपदप्रकृतिस्वरश्च बोध्यः ॥—समुदायात्सुविति । तच्चैकवचनमेवेति अन्तरङ्गैकसंख्यावरुद्धो द्विरुक्तार्थः संख्यान्तरे निराकाङ्क्ष इति प्रागेवोक्तलात् ॥—पूर्वभाग इति । नतूत्तरभागेऽपि । तथाहि द्विधात्र पुंवद्भावः ‘सर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे’ इति वा ‘स्त्रियाः पुंवत्’ इति वा ॥ तत्राद्यः पूर्वभागस्यैव ‘भन्नैषा’ इति ज्ञापकादित्युक्तम् । द्वितीयस्तु समानाधिकरणे परे विश्वीयते, न चोत्तरभागस्य समानाधिकरणपरलमस्तीति भावः ॥—अवग्रहे विशेष इति । एकैकयेत्येकएकयेति भवतीत्यर्थः ॥—एकैकस्यै इति । ननु सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावाविव वहुव्रीहौ सर्वनामसंज्ञाभावोऽपि दृष्ट इत्ययमपि वहुव्रीहिवद्भावेनातिदिश्यताम् । तथाच स्मायादेशोऽत्र दुर्लभ इति चेत् । अत्राहुः । सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावाविव सर्वनामसंज्ञाभावः शास्त्रेण न दृष्टः । किं तु वहुव्रीहेगौणत्वात्सर्ववाचकत्वं न संभवतीति तदभावो दृष्ट इति नायमतिदिश्यते । ‘न वहुव्रीहौ’ इति शास्त्रं त्वलौकिकवाक्ये निषेधकं, नतु वहुव्रीहावित्युक्तत्वादिति

Bālamanoramā

एकं बहुव्रीहिवत् - एकं बहुव्रीहिवत् । द्विरुक्त इति । द्विर्वचनं प्राप्त इत्यर्थः । एतच्च प्रकरणाल्लभ्यते,वीप्सामात्रविषयमिद॑मिति भाष्याच्च । तेनेति । बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वेन सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावौ सिध्यत इत्यर्थः । तत्र सुब्लोपमुदाहरति-एकैकमिति । इहेति ।एकैक॑मित्यत्र एकमित्यस्य द्विर्वचने सति, एकमेकमिति स्थिते सुपो लुकि, समुदायात्सुबित्यन्वयः । ननुयत्र सङ्घाते पूर्वो भागः पदं तस्य चेद्भवति तर्हि समासस्यैवे॑ति नियमेन समुदायस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वाऽभावात्कथमिह सुपो लुक्, कथं वा समुदायात्सुबित्यत आह — बहुव्रीहिवद्भावादेव प्रातिपदिकत्वादिति । एतच्चसुपोर्लुकी॑त्यत्र,समुदायात्सु॑बित्यत्र च मध्यमणिन्यायेनान्वेति । अथ पुंवत्त्वेऽप्युदाहरति — एकैकयाऽऽहुत्येति ।एकये॑त्यस्य द्विर्वचने सति एकया — एकयेति स्थिते,बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वेन समुदायस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वात्सुपोर्लुकि, पूर्वखण्डस्य पुंवत्त्वे कृते, समुदायात्पुनस्तृतीयोत्पत्तौ, एकैकयेति रूपम् । बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वाऽभावे तु इह समुदायस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वा.ञभावात्सुपोर्लुक्, पूर्वखण्डस्य पुंवत्त्वं च न स्यात्, उत्तरपदपरकत्वाऽभावात्, समासचरमावयवस्यैव उत्तरपदत्वादिति भावः ।एक#ऐका॑मित्यत्र उत्तरखण्डस्यसर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे॑ इति पुंवत्त्वं बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वे सत्यपि न प्रवृत्तिमर्हति, पूर्वस्यैवेदं 'भस्त्रैषाद्वे' ति लिङ्गादित्युक्तत्वादिति । बोध्यम् । ननु सुपोर्लुकि पूर्वखण्डस्य एकाशब्दस्य पुंवत्त्वे सत्यसति वा वृद्धौ एकैकयेति सिध्यत्येवेत्यत आह — इह पूर्वभागे इति । अवग्रहे इति । समस्तपदस्य द्विधा करणे पूर्वखण्डोऽवग्रहः ।तस्य पूर्वोऽवग्रहः॑ इति प्रातिशाख्यम् । 'एकैकयेत्येक-एकया' इतीष्यते पूर्वखण्डस्य पुवत्त्वम् । बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वाऽभावे तु एकैकयेत्येका-एकयेति स्यादिति भावः । तैत्तिरीयास्तु 'एकैकयेत्येका एकया' इत्येवाऽवगृह्णन्ति ।एकं समासव॑दित्येव सिद्धे बहुव्रीहिग्रहणंबहुव्रीहौ प्रकृत्यापूर्वपद॑मिति स्वरार्थम् । ननु बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वे सति 'न बहिव्रीहौ' इति सर्वनामत्वनिषेधादेकैकस्यैदेहीत्यादौ कथं सर्वनामकार्यमित्यर्थ आह — न बहुव्रीहावित्यत्रेति ।विभाषा दिक्समासे बहुव्रीहौ॑ इत्यतो बहुव्रीहिग्रहणानुवृत्त्यैव सिद्धे न बहुव्रीहौ॑ इत्यत्र पुनर्बहुव्रीहिग्रहणं मुख्यबहुव्रीहिलाभार्थम् । अतो बहुव्रीहिवदित्यतिदिष्टबहुव्रीहौ सर्वनामत्वनिषेधो नेत्यर्थः । तदाह — त#एनेति । तदेवं प्राचीनोक्तं परिहारमुक्त्वा सिद्धान्तिमतेनाह — वस्तुतस्त्विति । एतदिति । 'न बहुव्रीहौ' इति सूत्रमित्यर्थः । एवं च बहुव्रीहावपि सर्वंनामत्वस्य भाष्यसंमततया बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वातिदेशे सत्यपि सर्वनामत्वं निर्बाधमिति भावः । सूत्रमतेऽपीति ।उपसर्जनत्वादेव बहुव्रीहौ सर्वनामत्वनिषेधेसिद्धे ' नबहुव्रीहौ' इति बहुव्रीह्रर्थके अलौकिकविग्रहवाक्ये एव समासात्प्राक्सर्वनामत्वं निषिध्यत इति प्रागेवोक्तम् । तस्मादिह बहुव्रीह्रतिदेशप्रयुक्तसर्वनामकार्याऽभावशङ्कैव नास्तीत्यर्थः । एकैकस्मै देहीति । इह द्वयोरपि सुपोर्लुकि पुनः सर्वादिपठितैकशब्दान्ततया सर्वनामत्वात्समैभाव इति भावः ।

translator notes

commentary TB: 'dve' is carried forward (anuvartate), and it supplies what is referred to (anuvādya), hence the kaumudī's 'dviruktaḥ'. Followed for the bracketed anuvṛtti in sutra_en and for 'when doubled' in k1.
commentary BM: 'dviruktaḥ' means 'that has obtained doubling', known from the context and from the Bhāṣya's 'this concerns only vīpsā (vīpsāmātraviṣayam idam)'. Since by the restriction 'yatra saṅghāte pūrvo bhāgaḥ padaṃ … samāsasyaiva' the whole could not otherwise be a prātipadika, 'bahuvrīhivadbhāvād eva prātipadikatvāt' is construed with both 'supor luki' and 'samudāyāt sup' (like a middle gem, madhyamaṇinyāya). Followed: 'because the whole is a prātipadika precisely by…' is placed first so that it governs both the luk and the sup after the whole, and the derivation puts prātipadikatva before the luk; the starting form ekam ekam in the derivation is BM's.
commentary TB: sublopa and puṃvadbhāva are extended simply because they are seen in the bahuvrīhi, though not specially enjoined for it; the accent of the first member in its original form (pūrvapadaprakṛtisvara) is also to be understood; the sup after the whole is singular only, since the doubled sense is bound by the antaraṅga singular number. Recorded.
commentary BM: in ekaikayā, ekayā is doubled, the whole is a prātipadika by bahuvrīhivad-bhāva, luk of the sup affixes, puṃvattva of the first part, the third case again after the whole; without the extension there would be neither luk nor puṃvattva, since only the last member of a compound is an uttarapada. Since ekaikayā results with or without puṃvattva, the difference is in the avagraha: 'ekaikayety eka-ekayā' is wanted, whereas without the extension it would be 'ekā-ekayā'; the Taittirīyas, however, divide it as 'ekā ekayā'. The word 'bahuvrīhi' [rather than 'samāsa'] is for the accent by 'bahuvrīhau prakṛtyā pūrvapadam' (A 6.2.1). Followed for the bracketed gloss on avagraha.
commentary TB: 'in the first part', not in the second: puṃvadbhāva by 'sarvanāmno vṛttimātre' belongs to the first part only (shown by 'bhastraiṣā…'), and that by 'striyāḥ puṃvat…' needs a following coreferential word, which the second part lacks; 'avagrahe viśeṣaḥ' means the avagraha is 'ekaikayā ity eka-ekayā'. Followed for the bracketed avagraha form.
commentary BM: 'etat' in 'pratyākhyātam etat' is the sūtra 'na bahuvrīhau'; on the Bhāṣya's view sarvanāman status holds even in a bahuvrīhi, so it holds under the extension too. On the sūtra-view, since the prohibition in a bahuvrīhi is already achieved by its being subordinate (upasarjana), 'na bahuvrīhau' prohibits sarvanāman status only in the alaukika analytic statement before compounding. In ekaikasmai, after luk of both sups, the whole ends in eka, which is in the sarvādi list, so smai comes. Followed for '[sūtra]' and '[sarvanāman status]' in k1.
commentary TB: the absence of sarvanāman status in a bahuvrīhi is not extended like sublopa and puṃvadbhāva, since it is not an effect seen through a rule but a consequence of the bahuvrīhi's secondary (gauṇa) sense, and 'na bahuvrīhau' prohibits only in the alaukika statement. Recorded; consistent with the English.
translator The kaumudī gives only prātipadikatva by bahuvrīhivad-bhāva, luk of the two sup affixes and a sup after the whole; the vowel combination eka + eka → ekaika is implicit and is not supplied in the English, so the derivation names no intermediate form between ekam ekam and ekaikam. For ekaikayā the kaumudī gives no steps; they are in BM's note above.

SK 2145 · A 8.1.10V

आबाधे च ॥ २१४५ ॥

ābādhe ca

ābādhe ca — And when pain (ābādha) [is to be made manifest, two word-forms come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 — and 'bahuvrīhivat' is carried forward (anuvṛtti) from SK 2144 by 'ca', as the kaumudī's 'bahuvrīhivac ca' shows].

Rule. When pain (ābādha) is to be made manifest, a word is doubled. By the word ca "and", the doubled word is also treated like a bahuvrīhi. Bhaṭṭoji states both: "two word-forms come, and it is like a bahuvrīhi." He glosses ābādha as pīḍā "pain".

Example.

gataḥ gataḥ "gone, gone" → one prātipadika by the bahuvrīhi treatment

→ both endings deleted by luk → gata gata

→ the ending after the whole → gatagataḥ.

Bhaṭṭoji says this is the cry of one tormented by separation. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators supplies the subject: "the time [spent] without the beloved". That is why the form is masculine: "[the time] is gone, gone!"

gatā gatā [priyā] "[the beloved] is gone, gone" → one prātipadika; both endings deleted

→ the first half becomes masculine, gatā → gata (SK 831)

→ gatagatā.

Applies when / blocked by. How can SK 831 apply? It needs a feminine later member (uttarapada) that refers to the same thing. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both answer. The second gatā names the same woman as the first. And it counts as a later member through the transfer itself.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators limits the transfer. It does not bring the samāsānta affixes, the closing affixes added to compounds. He gives the reason. Those affixes are restricted to compounds formed by the rules of the compound section. A pair only treated like a compound is not one of them. So the doubled forms are dhūrdhūḥ and panthāḥ panthāḥ, with no such affix.

Watch out. Our copy of this commentator reads priyā vinā kāla, with the nasal and the visarga lost. Another copy reads priyāṃ vinā kālaḥ "the time without the beloved", and the sense needs it. We follow that reading.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

पीडायां द्योत्यायां द्वे स्तो बहुव्रीहिवच्च । गतगतः । विरहात्पीड्यमानस्येयमुक्तिः । बहुव्रीहिवद्भावात्सुब्लुक् । गतगता । इह पुंवद्भावः ॥

When pain (pīḍā) is to be made manifest, two [word-forms] come, and [the doubled word is treated] like a bahuvrīhi (bahuvrīhivat). gatagataḥ ('[time] has gone, gone!'): this is the utterance of one tormented by separation. Because of the treatment as a bahuvrīhi (bahuvrīhivad-bhāva) there is luk of sup. gatagatā ('[she is] gone, gone!'): here [because of the same bahuvrīhivad-bhāva] there is treatment as masculine (puṃvadbhāva) [of the first part].

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 338

—आवाधे च ॥—इहेति । वहुव्रीहिवद्भावादित्यनुषज्यते । तथा च ‘स्त्रियाः पुंवत्—’ इति प्रवर्तते । न च द्विरुक्तस्य परमुत्तरपदं नेति वाच्यम् । वहुव्रीहिवदित्यतिदेशवलेनैव उत्तरपदत्वस्यापि लाभात् । नतु वहुव्रीहिवद्भावेनोत्तरपदत्वलाभे सति ननेत्यत्र ‘नलोपो ननः’ इति कस्मान्न भवति । उच्यते । ‘नलोपो ननः’ इत्यत्र उत्तरपदे इति प्रवर्तते, नन इति च कार्यिणो निर्देशः, तत्र साक्षाच्छिष्टेन कार्यित्वेन ननो निमित्तभावो वाध्यते । यथा मद्रहदो भद्रहद् इति । अत्र रेफस्य ‘अचो रहाभ्याम्—’ इति द्वित्वप्रसङ्गे आकरे उक्तं ‘नेमौ रहौ कार्यिणौ किं तु निमित्तमेतौ द्विर्वचनस्य’ इति ॥ नन्वेवमपि ‘धूर्धूः’ ‘पन्थाःपन्थाः’ इत्यादौ ‘ऋक्पूरब्धूर्—’ इति समासान्तः स्यादिति चेत् । न । ‘समासाच्च तद्विषयात्’ इत्यतः समासादित्यनुवर्तमाने ‘समासान्ताः’ इति पुनः समासग्रहणं हि समासाधिकारविहितो यः समासस्तत्परिग्रहार्थम् । तेनातिदेशिके समासे समासान्तानामप्रवृत्तिरिति दिक्

Bālamanoramā

आबाधे च - आबाधे च । आबाधः=पीडा । तदाह — पीडायामिति । गतगत इति । 'प्रिया विना काल' इति शेषः । आबाधं दर्शयितुमाह — विरहादिति । स्त्रीवियोगादित्यर्थः । बहुव्रीहिवद्भावादिति । 'गत' इत्यस्य द्विर्वचने सति बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वात्समुदायस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वेन सुपोर्लुकि समुदायात्सुबुत्पत्तिरित्यर्थः । गतगतेति ।ग्रिये॑ति शेषः । इयमपि स्त्रीविरहात्पीडमानस्यौक्तिः । एकस्या एव गमनकर्त्र्या द्विः कथनात्समानाधिकरणं स्त्रीलिङ्गमुत्तरपदमितिस्त्रियाः पुंव॑दिति पुंवत्त्वम्, बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वादुत्तरपदत्वस्यापि सत्त्वात् । तदाह — इह पुंवद्भाव इति ।

translator notes

commentary BM: ābādha = pīḍā ('pain'), which is why the kaumudī says 'pīḍāyām'. Followed.
commentary BM: gatagataḥ is spoken [by one parted from a woman]; 'viraha' is separation from a woman. With 'gata' doubled, the whole is a prātipadika by bahuvrīhivad-bhāva, so the sup affixes undergo luk and a sup arises after the whole. With gatagatā 'priyā' is supplied; since one and the same female agent of going is named twice, the second member is a coreferential feminine uttarapada, and puṃvattva comes by 'striyāḥ puṃvat…', the uttarapada status too being present through the extension. BM supplies with gatagataḥ 'priyāṃ vinā kālaḥ' ('the time [spent] without the beloved'), which accounts for the masculine gatagataḥ as against gatagatā [priyā]. Followed for '[time]' and '[of the first part]'.
commentary TB: with 'iha' the word 'bahuvrīhivadbhāvāt' is to be supplied (anuṣajyate), so 'striyāḥ puṃvat…' applies; the uttarapada status is obtained through the extension itself. Followed for the bracketed '[because of the same bahuvrīhivad-bhāva]'. TB further explains why 'nalopo nañaḥ' does not apply in nana (nañ there is named as the thing operated on, not as a condition) and why samāsāntas do not come in dhūrdhūḥ, panthāḥ panthāḥ (they are restricted to compounds enjoined in the samāsa section, not to an extended compound). Recorded.
textual BM's supplement to gatagataḥ reads 'priyā vinā kāla' in our source; Wikisource BM (purva-3-2/0123) reads 'priyāṃ vinā kāla iti śeṣaḥ', and the sense requires 'priyāṃ vinā kālaḥ' (anusvāra and visarga lost in our text). The English follows 'kālaḥ'.
textual The p43 scan collation (batch19) notes that NSP p. 338 (scan) seems to print 'āvādhe ca' (the b/v pair); ours 'ābādhe ca' is the sūtra form. It also reads 'pīḍāyāṃ dyotyāyām' like ours.

SK 2146 · A 8.1.11कर्मधारयवदतिदेशः

कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु ॥ २१४६ ॥

karmadhārayavaduttareṣu

karmadhārayavad uttareṣu — In the following [doublings — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 — the operation (kārya), supplied (śeṣa), is] as for a karmadhāraya.

Rule. In the doublings that follow this rule, the operation is as for a karmadhāraya (karmadhārayavat). This is itself a heading. It covers SK 2147 to SK 2150.

A vārttika states the purpose: prayojanaṃ sublopapuṃvadbhāvāntodāttatvāni. "The purpose [of this]: deletion of the case-ending (sublopa), treatment as masculine (puṃvadbhāva), and final udātta (antodāttatva)." Antodātta means having the high accent on the last vowel. Bhaṭṭoji quotes it from the Bhāṣya, which has it in a slightly fuller wording.

Example.

The rule does nothing by itself. Its three fruits all show in the first example of SK 2147:

paṭvī paṭvī → case-endings deleted; first half masculine → paṭupaṭvī, with the high accent on its last vowel.

Applies when / blocked by. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators cites the Vṛtti, an older commentary on the Aṣṭādhyāyī. The heading alone would carry the transfer forward, so the words "in the following" are there only for clarity. The other commentator adds that the rule anudāttaṃ ca (SK 3670), though a heading, has no bearing on the final udātta. He follows the Bhāṣya in this.

Watch out. This transfer is a heading, not a one-rule transfer like SK 2144. It reaches every doubling to the end of the chapter, unless a later rule or vārttika says otherwise.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

इह उत्तरेषु द्विर्वचनेषु कर्मधारयवत्कार्यम् ॥

In the doublings (dvirvacana) that follow [this rule], the operation is as for a karmadhāraya (karmadhārayavat).

vārttika

प्रयोजनं सुब्लोपपुंवद्भावान्तोदात्तत्वानि

(vārttika) The purpose [of this]: deletion of sup (sublopa), treatment as masculine (puṃvadbhāva) and final acute accent (antodāttatva).

(वार्तिकम्) ॥

—

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 338

—कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु । अधिकारेणैव सिद्धे ‘वदुत्तरेषु’ इति वचनं विस्पष्टार्थमिति वृत्तिः

Bālamanoramā

कर्मधारयवत् उत्तरेषु - कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु ।कार्यं स्या॑दिति शेषः । कर्मधारयवत्त्वस्य फलमाह — प्रयोजनमिति । सुब्लोपादीनां प्रत्येकान्वयाभिप्रायमेकवचनम् । अन्तोदात्तत्वानीति ।अनुदात्तं चे॑त्यधिकृतमपि भाष्यप्रामाण्यान्नात्र सम्बध्यत इति भावः ।

translator notes

commentary BM: 'kāryaṃ syāt' is to be supplied (śeṣa). Followed for the bracketed supplement in sutra_en.
commentary TB cites the Vṛtti: since [the extension to the following rules] would be achieved by adhikāra alone, the wording '…vad uttareṣu' is for explicitness (vispaṣṭārtha). Recorded.
commentary BM introduces the words as Bhaṭṭoji stating the fruit of karmadhārayavattva ('phalam āha — prayojanam iti'); the singular 'prayojanam' is meant to connect with each of sublopa etc.; with antodāttatva, 'anudāttaṃ ca' (A 8.1.3), though an adhikāra, is not connected here, on the authority of the Bhāṣya. Followed for 'The purpose'.
textual Ours reads 'iha uttareṣu dvirvacaneṣu'; NSP p. 338 (scan) clearly reads 'ita uttareṣu dvirvacaneṣu' ('in the doublings following from here'); the p43 scan collation (batch19, class V) notes that Wikisource reads 'iha' like ours. Both readings yield the English given.
textual Our digital source files 'prayojanaṃ sublopapuṃvadbhāvāntodāttatvāni' as a vārttika block (k2) and opens k3 with the editorial tag '(vārttikam)' and a double daṇḍa, so k3 is rendered '—'. NSP p. 338 (scan) runs the sentence on as kaumudī prose after 'karmadhārayavat kāryam', in plain type and without the vārttika sign (batch19, class M); Wikisource tags it as a vārttika (vā 4689). The Mahābhāṣya on A 8.1.11 has it as a vārttika in the fuller form 'karmadhārayavattve prayojanaṃ sublopapuṃvadbhāvāntodāttatvāni' (mbh.8.1.11.1.v1); Bhaṭṭoji quotes it without 'karmadhārayavattve'. The English labels it '(vārttika)'; the print's omission of the sign is recorded here.
translator NSP omits the vārttika sign, but the Bhāṣya on A 8.1.11 has the sentence as a vārttika (with 'karmadhārayavattve' before 'prayojanam'), so it is labelled as one; BM's 'phalam āha' does not bear on its status.

SK 2147 · A 8.1.12V

प्रकारे गुणवचनस्य ॥ २१४७ ॥

prakāre guṇavacanasya

prakāre guṇavacanasya — When similarity (prakāra) is to be conveyed, [two word-forms (dve) come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 —] of a guṇavacana, a word expressing a quality, [and the doubled form is treated like a karmadhāraya — by the adhikāra of SK 2146].

Rule. When similarity (prakāra) is to be conveyed, a guṇavacana, a word for a quality, is doubled. By the heading SK 2146, the doubled form is treated like a karmadhāraya. Bhaṭṭoji glosses prakāra as sādṛśya "similarity".

The word prakāra can also mean "difference". Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say that "similarity" is fixed only by the tradition's explanation (vyākhyāna).

Example.

paṭvī paṭvī "skilful, skilful" (feminine)

→ treated like a karmadhāraya: one prātipadika, both endings deleted

→ the first half becomes masculine by SK 746, paṭvī → paṭu

→ the whole takes the high accent on its last vowel by samāsasya (SK 3734, in the accent section)

→ paṭupaṭvī "somewhat skilful (she)".

In the masculine, paṭupaṭuḥ. Bhaṭṭoji gives its meaning: paṭusadṛśaḥ, "like one who is skilful". That is to say, īṣatpaṭuḥ, "somewhat skilful".

Both kinds of quality-word are taken here, Bhaṭṭoji says. One kind names a substance in which a quality is subordinate. The other names the quality alone.

śuklaśuklaṃ rūpam "a whitish colour": the quality alone.

śuklaśuklaḥ paṭaḥ "a whitish cloth": a substance with the quality.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says the word rūpam "colour" shows that the first example names the quality alone. The other says this sentence rejects the view that a guṇavacana names only a substance.

Applies when / blocked by. Why is the karmadhāraya transfer needed, after the bahuvrīhi transfer? The bahuvrīhi treatment would already give paṭupaṭvī, through SK 831. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both answer. The karmadhāraya treatment brings SK 746, and SK 746 reaches words that SK 831 does not. It reaches even words with k before the final vowel, such as kārikā. One of them gives kālakakālikā.

Now come the vārttikas on this sūtra, in Bhaṭṭoji's order. Each adds a new sense in which a word is doubled.

Vārttika 1: succession in order. Ānupūrvye dve vācye: "when succession in order (ānupūrvya) is to be conveyed, two word-forms should be stated".

mūle "at the root" → doubled for order → mūle mūle sthūlaḥ "at the root, at the root, [it is] thick". Each part nearer the root is thicker than the part beyond it.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says there is no karmadhāraya treatment here, following the Bhāṣya's example. So the seventh-case ending of mūle stays in both halves. The other says why this is not pervasion. A bamboo stick has only one real root. Other parts are "root" only relative to the parts above them.

Vārttika 2: alarm. Saṃbhrameṇa pravṛttau yatheṣṭam anekadhā prayogo nyāyasiddhaḥ. "When someone acts in alarm (saṃbhrama), using the word many times, as often as one wishes, is established by reasoning."

sarpa "snake!" and budhyasva "wake up!" → repeated in alarm

→ sarpa sarpa, budhyasva budhyasva "Snake, snake! Wake up, wake up!"

→ or three times: sarpa sarpa sarpa, budhyasva budhyasva budhyasva.

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators explains the wording. Saṃbhrama is haste caused by fear and the like. The word anekadhā "many times" suspends the "two" of the heading. Yatheṣṭam "as one wishes" allows even a single use. And there is no karmadhāraya treatment, so the ending stays. The other commentator explains "by reasoning": use as many words as the hearer needs to grasp the meaning.

Vārttika 3: repetition or intensity of an action. Kriyāsamabhihāre ca: "and when kriyāsamabhihāra, repetition or intensity of an action, is to be conveyed, two word-forms come".

lunīhi "reap!" → doubled → lunīhi lunīhīty evāyaṃ lunāti "this man reaps in the manner 'Reap! Reap!'".

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives the grammar. Lunīhi is the imperative of lū "to cut, reap". The imperative is named loṭ; here it comes in the sense of repeated or intense action (SK 2825). The following lunāti is an anuprayoga, a finite verb of the same root added after it (SK 2827). Both rules are taught with the verbs, in the second half. The whole means intense reaping by a single agent.

Bhaṭṭoji then asks why the vārttika is needed. Doubling for repetition is already given by SK 2140. So the vārttika serves doubling in the sense of intensity (bhṛśa). Or else it lets the doubling signify repetition jointly with the loṭ. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both draw the consequence. A yaṅ form such as pāpacyate "he cooks intensely" is not doubled. One of them gives the reason. Loṭ does not always mean repetition, so it needs the doubling beside it. Yaṅ always means it, and signifies it alone.

Vārttika 4: exchange of action. Karmavyatihāre sarvanāmno dve vācye, samāsavac ca bahulam. "When exchange of action (karmavyatihāra) is to be conveyed, two word-forms of a pronoun (sarvanāman) should be stated. And the doubled form is variously (bahulam) treated like a compound." Exchange of action means each does the act to the other.

Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say the doubling itself is obligatory. The word bahulam goes only with the compound treatment. Bhaṭṭoji draws the result. Because of bahulam, doubled anya "other" and para "other" are not treated like a compound. Doubled itara "other" is always treated like one. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators adds that other pronouns are not doubled in this sense at all.

Vārttika 5: su for the first half. Asamāsavadbhāve pūrvapadasthasya supaḥ sur vaktavyaḥ. "Where there is no treatment like a compound, su should be stated as the substitute for a case-ending in the first member." So this vārttika concerns anya and para. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says any case-ending of the first member, of any case, is replaced by su, the first-case singular ending.

anyam anyam → the first member's ending am is replaced by su → anya + su (the second anyam is untouched)

→ the s of su becomes ru (SK 162)

→ ru becomes u (SK 163) → anya + u

→ a + u gives o by guṇa (SK 69) → anyo

→ anyo + anyam → anyo 'nyam

→ anyo 'nyaṃ viprā namanti "the brahmins bow to one another".

One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives these steps (su, ru, u, guṇa); Bhaṭṭoji gives only the result.

Likewise anyo 'nyau, anyo 'nyān, anyo 'nyena kṛtam "done by one another", anyo 'nyasmai dattam "given to one another". Only the second half changes its ending; the first half stays anyo.

anyo 'nyam and anyonyam are one form written two ways. Our text writes anyo 'nya- with the sign '. The printed edition writes anyonya- throughout.

Bhaṭṭoji cites the poet Māgha: anyo 'nyeṣāṃ puṣkarair āmṛśantaḥ "touching one another with the tips of their trunks". Bhaṭṭoji's citations answer an older view. One of his commentators states that view: this doubling is for the first-case singular only. The other describes it differently: su replaces only endings from the second case on, and in the singular only. Both say that the Bhāṣya's examples, and Māgha's usage, go against it. Scholars discuss this.

paraḥ param → parasparam "each other". Bhaṭṭoji says the visarga is replaced by s, because paraspara is in the kaskādi list (SK 144).

itaraḥ itaram → treated like a compound: both endings deleted, a fresh ending after the whole → itaretaram, itaretareṇa and so on. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives these steps.

Vārttika 6: ām in the feminine and neuter. Strīnapuṃsakayor uttarapadasthāyā vibhakter āmbhāvo vā vaktavyaḥ. "In the feminine and the neuter, ām should optionally be stated as substitute for the case-ending of the second member."

anyonyām or anyonyam; parasparām or parasparam; itaretarām or itaretaram.

ime brāhmaṇyau kule vā bhojayataḥ "these two brahmin women (or: these two families) feed each other". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators explains. This woman or family feeds the other, and the other feeds this one.

Bhaṭṭoji reports two views on the reach of ām.

Some say ām replaces the second-case ending only, because the Bhāṣya gives only such examples. So in the third case and the rest, even the feminine and neuter forms are as in the masculine.
Others say ām replaces the ending of every case, because the example is merely indicative (diṅmātra). One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators takes this second view as the settled one.

The verse on bahula. Bhaṭṭoji then quotes a verse. One of his commentators calls it an older verse. It lists what the word bahula in Vārttika 4 achieves:

daladvaye ṭābabhāvaḥ klībe cādḍvirahaḥ svamoḥ | samāse sor aluk ceti siddhaṃ bāhulakāt trayam ||

"Absence of ṭāp in both halves; in the neuter, absence of adḍ for su and am; and non-deletion of su in a compound: these three are established from bāhulaka." Bāhulaka means the force of the word bahula.

1. In the feminine anyonyam and parasparam, no feminine ṭāp appears in either half.

2. In the neuter anyonyam and itaretaram, adḍ does not replace su and am.

3. When the doubled form enters a further compound, the su of the first half is not deleted. The name for non-deletion is aluk.

Why each of the three needs bahula. Bhaṭṭoji shows that each result would otherwise go wrong.

Ṭāp. In feminine anyonyam and parasparam, ṭāp is due in both halves. Could the vārttika sarvanāmno vṛttimātre [puṃvadbhāvaḥ] remove it? That vārttika makes a pronoun masculine in any vṛtti. A vṛtti is a compound or similar derived formation. But anya and para are not treated like a compound. Nor is doubling itself a vṛtti. If it were, the masculine would wrongly come in yāṃ yāṃ priyaḥ praikṣata kātarākṣī sā sā "whichever woman the beloved looked at, she, the timid-eyed one…". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators lists the vṛttis as five: kṛt, taddhita, compound, ekaśeṣa, and the derived verb stems.
Adḍ. In neuter anyonyam and itaretaram, adḍ is due by SK 315.
Deletion of su. In anyonyasaṃsaktam ahastriyāmam "day and night joined to each other", deletion of the first half's su is due. So too in anyonyāśrayaḥ "mutual dependence", parasparākṣisādṛśyam "the likeness of each other's eyes", and aparasparaiḥ. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators analyses each of them as a compound, and in a compound the inner case-endings are deleted. (This is the rule of SK 650, chapter 17.)

Bhaṭṭoji concludes: all this is settled by the force of bāhulaka. His authorities are two passages of the Bhāṣya. One is the Bhāṣya's example to this very vārttika. The other is the phrase anyonyasaṃśrayaṃ tv etad under striyām (SK 453).

Watch out. Five places in this unit correct a slip in our text by the printed edition.

Our text of the Kaumudī reads antodātatvam. The 1915 printed edition reads antodāttatvam "final udātta". We follow the print.
Our text of the Kaumudī reads ānupūrvye dve aācye. The 1915 printed edition reads ānupūrvye dve vācye. We follow the print.
Our text of the Kaumudī reads sarpa sarva. The 1915 printed edition repeats the same word (sarpaḥ). We keep our form sarpa and repeat it: sarpa sarpa.
Our text of the Kaumudī reads samu-itya, with a letter lost. The 1915 printed edition reads samuccitya "jointly". We follow the print.
Our text of the Kaumudī reads pūrvapadasthasya supaṃ. The 1915 printed edition reads supaḥ "of a case-ending". We follow the print.

Two points of grammar are easily missed too. Not every doubling in this unit is compound-like: mūle mūle and sarpa sarpa keep their endings. And under Vārttika 4, anya and para are never compound-like, while itara always is.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

सादृश्ये द्योत्ये गुणवचनस्य द्वे स्तस्तच्च कर्मधारयवत् । कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु- SK 2146 इत्यधिकारात् । तेन पूर्वभागस्य पुंवद्भावः 'समासस्य' SK 3734 इत्यन्तोदातत्वं च । पटुपट्वी । पटुपटुः । पटुसदृशः । ईषत्पटुरिति यावत् । गुणोपसर्जनद्रव्यवाचिनः केवलगुणवाचिनश्चेह गृह्यन्ते । शुक्लशुक्लं रूपम् । शुक्लशुक्लः पटः ॥

When similarity (sādṛśya) is to be conveyed, two [word-forms] (dve) come for a guṇavacana word, and that [doubled form] is treated like a karmadhāraya (karmadhārayavat), because of the adhikāra 'karmadhārayavad uttareṣu' (SK 2146). Hence the prior part receives masculine treatment (puṃvadbhāva) [by 'puṃvat karmadhāraya…'], and the whole receives final acute accent (antodāttatva) by 'samāsasya' (SK 3734). paṭupaṭvī. paṭupaṭuḥ. [Meaning:] paṭusadṛśaḥ, 'like one who is skilful (paṭu)'; that is to say, īṣatpaṭuḥ, 'somewhat skilful'. Both words denoting a substance (dravya) in which a quality (guṇa) is the subordinate element (upasarjana), and words denoting a quality alone, are included here: śuklaśuklaṃ rūpam, 'a whitish colour' [a word for the quality alone]; śuklaśuklaḥ paṭaḥ, 'a whitish cloth'.

vārttika

आनुपूर्व्ये द्वे अाच्ये'

(vārttika) When succession in order (ānupūrvya) [is to be conveyed], two [word-forms] (dve) should be stated.

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ मूले मूले स्थूलः ॥

mūle mūle sthūlaḥ, 'at the root, at the root [it is] thick' [that is, each part nearer the root is thicker than the part beyond it].

vārttika

सम्भ्रमेण प्रवृत्तौ यथेष्टमनेकधा प्रयोगो न्यायसिद्धः

(vārttika) When [someone] acts in agitation (saṃbhrama), using [the word] many times (anekadhā), as often as one wishes (yatheṣṭam) [and not two times only], is established by reasoning (nyāyasiddha).

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ सर्प सर्व, बुध्यस्व बुध्यस्व । सर्प सर्प सर्प बुध्यस्व बुध्यस्व बुध्यस्व । 'क्रियासमभिहारे च' (वार्तिकम्) लुनीहि लुनीहीत्येवायं लुनाति । 'नित्यवीप्सयोः' SK 2140 इति सिद्धे भृशार्थे द्वित्वार्थमिदम् । पौनःपुन्येऽपि लोटा सह समु्चित्य द्योतकतां लब्धुं वा ॥

sarpa sarpa, budhyasva budhyasva, 'Snake, snake! Wake up, wake up!' sarpa sarpa sarpa, budhyasva budhyasva budhyasva. (vārttika) 'kriyāsamabhihāre ca', 'And when repetition or intensity of an action (kriyāsamabhihāra) [is to be conveyed, two word-forms (dve) come].' lunīhi lunīhīty evāyaṃ lunāti, 'This man reaps in the manner "Reap! Reap!"' [that is, he reaps intensely or again and again]. Since [doubling in the sense of repetition] is already established by 'nityavīpsayoḥ' (SK 2140), this [vārttika] serves for doubling in the sense of intensity (bhṛśa). Or else [it serves] so that, in [the sense of] repetition (paunaḥpunya) as well, [doubling] may, jointly with loṭ, obtain the role of signifier (dyotakatā).

vārttika

कर्मव्यतिहारे सर्वनाम्नो द्वे वाच्ये, समासवच्च बहुलम्

(vārttika) When exchange of action (karmavyatihāra) [is to be conveyed], two [word-forms] (dve) of a sarvanāman should be stated; and [the doubled form] is variously (bahulam) treated like a compound (samāsavat).

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ बहुलग्रहणादन्यपरयोर्न समासवत् । इतरशब्दस्य तु नित्यम् ॥

Because the word bahula is used, [doubled] anya and para are not treated like a compound; but for the word itara [treatment like a compound] is obligatory (nitya).

vārttika

असमासवद्भावे पूर्वपदस्थस्य सुपं सुर्वक्तव्यः

(vārttika) When there is no treatment like a compound (asamāsavadbhāva), su should be stated [as substitute] for a sup standing in the prior member (pūrvapada).

(वार्तिकम्) । अन्योऽन्यं विप्रा नमन्ति अन्योऽन्यौ । अन्योऽन्यान् । अन्योऽन्येन कृतम् । अन्योऽन्यस्मै दत्तमित्यादि । 'अन्योऽन्येषां पुष्करैरामृशन्तः' इति माघः । एवं परस्परम् । अत्र कस्कादित्वाद्विसर्गस्य सः । इतरेतरम् । इतरेतरेणेत्यादि ॥

anyo'nyaṃ viprā namanti, 'the brahmins bow to one another'. anyo'nyau. anyo'nyān. anyo'nyena kṛtam, 'done by one another'. anyo'nyasmai dattam, 'given to one another', and so on. 'anyo'nyeṣāṃ puṣkarair āmṛśantaḥ', 'touching one another with the tips of their trunks', so Māgha. Likewise parasparam. Here s [replaces] the visarga, because [paraspara] belongs to the kaskādi group. itaretaram. itaretareṇa, and so on.

vārttika

स्त्रीनपुंसकयोरुत्तरपदस्थाया विभक्तेराम्भावो वा वक्तव्यः

(vārttika) In the feminine and the neuter, ām should optionally (vā) be stated as substitute for the vibhakti standing in the latter member (uttarapada).

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ अन्योन्याम्-अन्योन्यम् । परस्पराम्-परस्परम् । इतरेतराम्-इतरेतरं वा । इमे ब्राह्मण्यौ कुले वा भोजयतः । अत्र केचित् । आमादेशो द्वितीयाया एव । भाष्यादौ तथैवोदाहृतत्वात् । तेन स्त्रीनपुंसकयोरपि तृतीयादिषु पुंवदेव रूपमित्याहुः । अन्ये तूदाहरणस्य दिङ्मात्रत्वात्सर्वविभक्तीनामादेशमाहुः । दलद्वये टाबभावः क्लीबे चाद्ड्विरहः स्वमोः । समासे सोरलुक्चेति सिद्धं बाहुलकात्त्रयम्॥ तथाहि । अन्योऽन्यं परस्परमित्यत्र दलद्वयेऽपि टाप्प्राप्तः । न च ।

anyonyām or anyonyam; parasparām or parasparam; itaretarām or itaretaram: ime brāhmaṇyau kule vā bhojayataḥ, 'these two brahmin women (or: these two families) feed each other'. On this, some [say]: the ām substitute is for the second case (dvitīyā) only, because in the Bhāṣya and elsewhere it is exemplified only in that way; hence even in the feminine and the neuter, in the third case (tṛtīyā) and the rest, the form is just as in the masculine. So they say. Others, however, say that the [ām] substitute is for all vibhaktis, because the example is merely indicative (diṅmātra). (verse) daladvaye ṭābabhāvaḥ klībe cādḍvirahaḥ svamoḥ | samāse sor aluk ceti siddhaṃ bāhulakāt trayam || 'Absence of ṭāp in both halves; in the neuter, absence of adḍ [as substitute] for su and am; and non-deletion (aluk) of su [in the prior segment] in a compound [of the doubled form with another word]: these three are established from bāhulaka [the word bahula].' To explain: in anyonyam and parasparam [in the feminine] ṭāp is due in both halves. Nor [can it be said that]

vārttika

सर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे

the vārttika 'sarvanāmno vṛttimātre', 'for a sarvanāman, in any complex formation (vṛtti) whatever',

(वार्तिकम्) ॥ इति पुंवद्भावः । अन्यपरयोरसमासवद्भावात् । न च द्विर्वचनमेव वृत्तिः । 'यां यां प्रियः प्रैक्षत कातराक्षी सा सा' इत्यादावतिप्रसङ्गात् । 'अन्योऽन्यमितरेतरम्' इत्यत्र च 'अद्ड्डतरादिभ्यः-' SK 315 इत्यद्ड् प्राप्तः । 'अन्योऽन्यसंसक्तमहस्त्रियामम्' 'अन्योऽन्याश्रयः', 'परस्पराक्षिसादृश्यम्' 'अपरस्परैः' इत्यादौ सोर्लुक्च प्राप्तः । सर्वं बाहुलकबलेन समाधेयम् । प्रकृतवार्तिकभाष्योदाहरणम् 'स्त्रियाम्' SK 453 इति सूत्रे 'अन्योऽन्यसंश्रयं त्वेतद्' इति भाष्यं चात्र प्रमाणमिति ॥

[supplies] masculine treatment (puṃvadbhāva) [here]; for anya and para are not treated like a compound. Nor is doubling itself a vṛtti, because [that would give] overextension in 'yāṃ yāṃ priyaḥ praikṣata kātarākṣī sā sā', 'whichever [woman] the beloved looked at, she, the timid-eyed one, …', and the like. And in anyonyam and itaretaram [in the neuter], adḍ is due by 'adḍ ḍatarādibhyaḥ…' (SK 315). And in 'anyonyasaṃsaktam ahastriyāmam', 'day and night joined to each other', 'anyonyāśrayaḥ', 'mutual dependence', 'parasparākṣisādṛśyam', 'the likeness of each other's eyes', 'aparasparaiḥ' and the like, luk of su [standing in the prior segment] is due. All [this] is to be settled by the force of bāhulaka. The authority for this is the Bhāṣya's example to the vārttika under discussion, and the Bhāṣya [passage] 'anyonyasaṃśrayaṃ tv etad' under the sūtra 'striyām' (SK 453).

Tattvabodhinī

NSP p. 338–340

—प्रकारे गुणवचनस्य । यद्यपि प्रकारशब्दो भेदे सादृश्ये च वर्तते । वहुभिः प्रकारैर्भुङ्क्षे, वहुभिर्भेदैर्विशेषैरित्यवगमात् । ब्राह्मणप्रकारोऽयं माणवकः, ब्राह्मणसदृश इत्यवगमाच्च । तथापीह विवक्षितमाह—सादृश्य इति । व्याख्यानमेवात्र शरणम् ॥—पुंवद्भाव इति । ‘पुंवत्कर्मधारय—’ इति सूत्रात् । तच्च कोपधादिध्वपि कालककालिकेत्यादिषु प्रवर्तते न बहुव्रीहिवद्भावे प्रकृते कर्मधारयवद्भावोक्तिर्व्ययंति शङ्काया निरवकाश इति बोध्यम् ॥—पटुपटुरिति । इह द्वित्वेन जातीयरो वाधा नेष्यते पटुजातीय इति वामनः । अन्यथा ब्राह्मणजातीय इत्यादावगुणवचनेऽपि भेदरूपेऽयं सावकाशो जातीयर् गुणवचनेषु सादृश्यपरेण द्वित्वेन वाध्येतेति भावः ॥ गुणवचनस्येति किम् । अग्निर्माणवकः । सिंहो माणवकः ॥ यद्यपीहाग्निसिंहशब्दाभ्यां गौण्या वृत्त्या तैक्ष्ण्यकौर्यादिगुणो गम्यते, तथापि प्रकारे वर्तमानस्येत्येव सिद्धे गुणवचनमहणसामर्थ्यात् मुख्यवृत्त्या गुणपराणामेव द्वित्वं, न त्वन्येषामित्याकरः । ‘नवंनवं प्रीतिरहो करोति’ इत्यत्र वीप्सायां द्विर्वचनम् । अनेन तु द्विर्वचने सुव्युक् स्यात् । ‘नवनवा वनवायुभिराददे’ इत्यत्र लनेनैव द्विर्वचनं, नतु वीप्सायामिति पुंवद्भावः ॥ कथं ‘भीतभीत इव शीतमयूखः’ इति भारविः । इवशब्देन सादृश्यस्योक्तया इह प्रकारे द्विलायोगात् । सत्यम् । भीतेभ्यो भीत इति कथंचिद्याख्येयम् । तेनातिभीत इति फलितम् । ‘आधिक्ये द्वे वाच्ये’ इति वार्तिकेन भीतभीतादौ द्विलमिति दुर्धटादिभिरुक्तं समाधानं नादर्तव्यम् । तादृशस्य वार्तिकस्याप्रसिद्धत्वात् । अथ कथं ‘खिन्नःखिन्नः शिखरिषु पदं न्यस्य गन्तासि यत्र क्षीणःक्षीणः परिलघुपयः स्रोतसां चोपयुज्य’ इति मेघदूतः । पदार्थभेदस्याभावेन वीप्सार्थस्यासंभवादिति चेत् । अत्राहुः । एकस्यापि खेदावस्थासु क्षयावस्थासु च भेदं परिकल्प्य वीप्सा बोध्येति ॥ अथ कथं ‘मन्दमन्दं नुदति पवनश्चानुकूलो यथा त्वाम्’ इति मेघदूतः । वीप्सार्थस्यासंभवादनेनैव द्विर्वचने कृते ‘मन्दमन्दमुदितः प्रययौ खम्’ इतिवत्सुव्युक् स्यादिति चेत् । सत्यम् । स्वतो मन्दगामिनं त्वां पवनो मन्दं नुदतीति कथंचिद्याख्येयम् । सिद्धस्य गतेश्चिन्तनीयत्वात् ॥—शुक्लशुक्लमिति । केवलगुणवाचिन उदाहरणमिति ध्वनयति—रूपमिति ॥—आनुपूर्व्ये इति । वीप्साभावादयमारम्भः ॥—मूले मूले इति । अग्रेअग्रे सूक्ष्मा इत्यप्युदाहर्तव्यम् । एकस्य वस्तुनो वेणुदण्डादेरेकमेव मुख्यं मूलमग्रं च । इतरेषां भागानामापेक्षिकोऽप्रमूलव्यपदेशः । स्थौत्यसौक्ष्म्ये अपि नैकरूपे, किं तर्हि यथामूलमुपचीयते स्थौत्यं, यथा अग्रं सौक्ष्म्यं तथा नेतरे भागा इति वीप्साया असंभवः ॥ ‘मूलेमूले पथि विटपिनाम्’ इत्यत्र तु वीप्सायां द्विर्वचनम् ॥ एतच्च हरदत्तप्रन्थे स्पष्टम् ॥—न्यायसिद्ध इति । यावद्भिः शब्दैः संबोध्योऽर्थमवगच्छति तावतां प्रयोक्तव्यत्वादिति भावः ॥—पौनःपुन्य इति । पुनःपुनर्भवितरि वर्तमानात्पुनःपुनःशब्दात् भावे प्रत्ययः ॥—लोटा सह समुच्चित्येति । नन्वत्र लोटा सह समुच्चित्य यथा द्विर्वचनं भवति, तथा क्रियासमभिहारे यङ्गि यङ्गा सह समुच्चित्य द्विर्वचनं स्यात् पापच्यतेपापच्यते बोभूयतेबोभूयते इति । अत्राहुः । लोट् क्रियासमभिहारं व्यभिचरति । समुच्चयेऽपि जायमानत्वात् । ततश्च लोट्द्विर्वचनयोरेव तद्द्योतकत्वं, न त्वेकैकैस्येति युक्तं लोडन्तस्य द्विर्वचनम् । यङ् तु क्रियासमभिहारं न व्यभिचरतीति द्विर्वचनं विनैव तस्य द्योतकत्वम् । तेन तदन्तस्य न द्विर्वचनमिति ॥—कर्मव्यतिहार इति । क्रियाविनियम इत्यर्थः ॥—द्वे इति । नित्यमेवेदं द्वित्वम्, बाहुलकं तु समासवद्भावस्यैव ॥ सुपः सुर्वक्तव्य इति । अत्र कैश्चिदुक्तं द्वितीयादीनामेवेदं स्वादेशविधानम् । अत एवोत्तरदलेऽपि द्वितीयादय एव न तु प्रथमा, तत्राप्येकवचनमेव न तु वचनान्तरमिति । तदपाणिनीयम् । भाष्यादावनुक्तत्वात् । तदेतद्ध्वनयन् वचनान्तरमुदाहरति—अन्योन्यावन्योन्यानिति ॥—माघ इति । स च भाष्यानुगुण एवेति भावः ॥ एतेनार्वाचीनमतं कवयोऽपि नाद्रियन्त इत्युक्तं भवति ॥ भारविश्वाह—‘क्षितिनभःसुरलोकनिवासिभिः कृतनिकेतमदृष्टपरस्परैः’ इति । अत्रादृष्टः परस्परो यैरिति विग्रहः ॥ यदि तु द्वितीयादीनामेव स्वादेशविधानं न तु प्रथमायाः, तर्ह्ययं प्रयोगो न सिद्ध्येदिति दिक् ॥—अन्योन्यमिति । न चात्र आमभावेऽपि टाप् स्यादिति शङ्काम् ॥ ‘बहुलग्रहणाद्रावभावः’ इत्यनुपदमेव वक्ष्यमाणत्वात् ॥ स्त्रीनपुंसकयोस्तृतीयादिषु पुंवदिति प्राचो ग्रन्थं परिष्कुर्वन्नाह— अत्र केचिदिति । वस्तुस्थितिमाह—अन्येत्विति ॥—अतिप्रसङ्गादिति । तथा च एकशेषप्रतिबन्धाद् द्विर्वचनस्यापि वृत्तित्वमाश्रित्य तद्बलेन पुंवद्भावो न शङ्क्यो लक्ष्यविरोधात् । ‘कारकं चेद्विजानीयायां यां मन्येत सा भवेत्’ इति ‘अकथित—’ सूत्रस्थ ‘यांयां’ इति भाष्यप्रयोगविरोधाच्चेति भावः ॥ नव्यास्तु ‘यांयां प्रियः प्रैक्षत्’ इत्यादिभाषप्रयोगे ‘सासा’ इति द्विवचनमयुक्तम् । द्विरुक्तार्थस्य सेत्यनेनैव परामर्शं शक्यत्वात् ॥ अत एव भाष्ये ‘यांयां मन्येत सा भवेत्’ इत्येवोक्तमित्याहुः ॥—सोलुंक् च प्राप्त इति । सुपः स्वादेशविधानस्यान्योन्यं परस्परमित्यत्र केवले चरितार्थलादिति भावः ॥—योऽयमात्मेत्यादि । आत्मात्मीययोरपि स्वशब्दवाच्यत्वात् ॥—यथायथमिति । ‘न लोका—’ इत्यनेन कृद्योगषष्ठीनिषेधः ज्ञातेत्यस्य तृत्रन्तत्वात् ॥ ‘यो य आत्मा’ इत्यर्थे विद्यमानयथायथशब्दस्यार्थमाह—यथास्वभावमिति । ‘आत्मा यत्नो धृतिर्युद्धिः स्वभावो ब्रह्म वर्ष्म च’ इत्यमरः ॥—पूर्वपदस्येति । द्विऔ द्विऔ इति स्थिते कर्मधारयवद्भावात्सुब्लुकि कृते पूर्वपदावयवस्येकारस्येत्यर्थः ॥—अत्वमुत्तरपदस्येति । उत्तरपदावयवस्येकारस्येत्यर्थः ॥—नपुंसकत्वं चेति । चकारादेकवद्भाव इत्यपि वोध्यम् । तेन ‘अतोऽम्’ इत्यमादेशे द्वन्द्वमिति सिध्यति ॥—रहस्यं द्वन्द्वशब्दवाच्यमिति । द्वाभ्यां निर्धृते रहस्ये योगरूढिरेवेत्यर्थः

Bālamanoramā

प्रकारे गुणवचनस्य - प्रकारे गुणवचनस्य । प्रकारशब्दः सादृश्ये वर्तते, व्याख्यानादित्यभिप्रेत्याह — सादृश्ये द्योत्य इति । गुणवचनशब्देनआकडारा॑दिति सूत्रस्थभाष्यपरिगणिताः शब्दा गृह्रन्त इतिवोतो गुणवचना॑दित्यादौ प्रपञ्चितमिदम् । तेनेति । कर्मधारयवत्त्वेनेत्यर्थः । पुंवद्भाव इति ।पुंवकर्मधारये॑त्यनेने॑ति शेषः । पटुपट्वीति । पट्वीशब्दस्य द्विर्वचने कर्मधारयवत्त्वात्पुवत्कर्मधारये॑ति पूर्वखण्डस्य पुंवत्त्वे रूपमिति भावः । यद्यपि बहुव्रीहिवत्त्वेऽपिस्त्रियाः पुंव॑दिति पुंवत्त्वादिदं सिद्धं, तथापि कारिकेत्यादिकोपधादिष्वपि पुंवत्त्वार्थंकर्मधारयव॑दिति वचनमिति भावः । पटुपटुरिति ।वोतो गुणवचना॑दिति ङीषभावे पुंसि च द्विर्वचने रूपम् । पटुसदृश इति । 'इत्यर्थ' इति शेषः । फलितमाह — ईषत्पटिरिति । इह गुणवचनशब्दस्य गुणोपसर्जनद्रव्यवाचित्वमेवेति भ्रमं निरस्यति — गुणोपसर्जनेति । शुक्लशुक्लं रूपमिति । शुक्लसदृशमित्यर्थः । ईषच्छुक्लमिति यावत् । एवं शुक्लशुक्लः पट इति बोध्यम् । आनुपूर्व्ये इति । अत्र वार्तिकेकर्मधारयव॑दिति न सम्बध्यते, तदुदाहरणे भाष्ये सुब्लोपाऽदर्शनादित्यभिप्रेत्योदाहरति — मूलेमूले इति । पूर्वपूर्वो मूलभाग उत्तरोत्तरमूलभागापेक्षया स्थूल इति । यावत् । संभ्रमेणेति । वार्तिकमिदम् । संभ्रमः=भयादिकृता त्वरा, तेन प्रवृत्तौ गम्यमानायां यथेष्टम्िच्छानुसारेण अनेकधाशब्दः प्रयोक्तव्य इति वक्तव्यमित्यर्थः । अनेकधेत्युक्तेद्र्वे इति निवर्तते ।यथेष्ट॑मित्युक्तेरसकृत्त्वेऽप्येकस्य प्रयोगः । बोधात्मकफलपर्यवसायित्वाच्छब्दप्रयोगस्येत्यर्थः । एतच्च भाष्ये स्पष्टम् । अत्रापि कर्मधारयवत्त्वानतिदेशान्न सुब्लुक्, भाष्ये तथैवोदाहरणात् ।क्रियासमभिहारे चेति । वार्तिकमिदम् । 'द्वे स्त' इति शेषः । पौनःपुन्यं भृशत्वं च क्रियासमभिहारः । लोडन्तविषयमेवेदम् ।क्रियासमभिहारे लोट् लोटो हिस्वौ वा च तध्वमो॑रिति सूत्रभाष्ये क्रियासमभिहारे लोण्मध्यमपुरुषैकवचनस्य द्वे भवत इति वक्तव्यमिति पाठमभिप्रेत्योदाहरति — लुनीहिलुनीहीत्येवायं लुनातीति । 'लूञ् छेदने' अस्मात्क्रियासमभिहारे लोट्, लोटो हिस्वौ॑ इति लोट् । तस्य हीत्यादेशः । श्नाविकरणः ।लुनीही॑त्यस्य अनेन द्विर्वचनम् ।यथाविध्यनुप्रयोगः पूर्वस्मि॑न्नित्यनुप्रयोगः । तस्माल्लडादयः । अतिशयेन पुनर्वा लवनं लुनीहीति द्विरुक्तस्यार्थः । एककर्तृकं लवनमनुप्रयोगस्याऽर्थः । इतिशब्दस्त्वभेदान्वये तात्पर्यं ग्राहयतीत्यादि मूल एव लकारार्थप्रक्रियायां स्फुटीभविष्यति । तथा च अतिशयितमेककर्तृकं लवनमिति फलितोऽर्थः । नित्येति ।नित्यवीप्सयो॑रिति पौनः पुन्ये द्विर्वचने सिद्धेऽपि भृशार्थे द्विर्वचनार्थमिदं वार्तिकमित्यर्थः । नन्बस्य भृशार्थ एव द्विर्वचनफलकत्वेभृशे चे॑त्येव सिद्धे 'क्रियासमभिहारे' इति व्यर्थमित्यत आह — पौनःपुन्येऽपीति । लुनीहि — लुनीहीत्यत्र पौनः पुन्ये लोटो द्विर्वचनस्य च समुच्चयार्थमिति यावत् । अन्यथा — पौनःपुन्येऽपीति । लुनीहि — लुनीहीत्यत्र पौनःपुन्ये द्विर्वचनस्य च समुच्चयार्थमिति यावत् । अन्यथा लोटैव पौनःपुन्यस्य द्योतितत्वात्तत्र नित्यवीप्सयोद्विर्वचनस्य प्रवृत्तिर्न स्यादित्यर्थः । एवं च 'धातोरेकाचः' इति पौनः पुन्ये यङन्ते 'पापच्यते' इत्यादौ न द्विर्वचनमित्यन्यत्र विस्तरः । कर्मव्यतिहारे इति । क्रिया विनिमयः=कर्मव्यतिहारः, तस्मिन्गम्ये सर्वनाम्नो द्वे स्तः । ते च द्विरुक्ते पदे बहुलं समासवदित्यर्थः । अत्रबहुल॑मिति समासवदित्यत्रैवान्वेति । द्विर्वचनं तु नित्यमेव । अन्यपरयोरिति । अन्यशब्दपरशब्दयोरेव बहुलं समासवत्त्वम्, इतरशब्दस्य तु नित्यमेवेत्यर्थः । अत एव अन्यशब्दस्य समासवत्त्वरहितमेव, इतरशब्दस्य तत्सहितमेवोदाहरणं भाष्ये दृश्यते । तथापरस्परोपपदाच्चे॑ति वार्तिकप्रयोगात्परशब्दस्यापि समासवत्त्वाऽभावो गम्यत इति भावः । एवंच क्रियासमभिहारे अन्यशब्दस्य परशब्दस्य च नित्यद्विर्वचनम् । द्विरुक्तयोस्तु समासवत्त्वं बहुलम् । इतरशब्दस्य तु तदुभयमपि नित्यम् । एतत्रयव्यतिरिक्तसर्वनामशब्दस्य तु नेदं द्वित्वं बहुलग्रहणादिति स्थितिः । असमासवद्भावे इति । इदमन्यपरशब्दयोरेव, इतरशब्दस्य समावत्त्वस्यैवोक्तत्वात् । सुपः सुरिति । सु॑बिति प्रत्याहारः । सप्तानामपि विभक्तीनां पूर्वपदस्थानां प्रथमैकवचनं सु इत्यादेशो वाच्य इत्यर्थः । इदं द्वित्वादिविधानं प्रथमैकवचनमात्र विषयमिति केचित् । तदेतद्भाष्यविरुद्धं, भाष्ये द्वितीयादिविभक्तेरूदाहृतत्वादित्यभिप्रेत्य द्वितीयादिविभक्तीरुदाहरति — अन्योन्यं विप्रा नमन्तीत्यादि । इह अन्यमन्यौ इत्यादीनां द्वित्वे पूर्ववत्सुपः सुः । प्रथमैकवचनस्यैवेदं द्वित्वादीत्येतन्न कविसंमतमित्याह — अन्योन्येषामित्यादि, माघ इत्यन्तम् ।परस्पर॑मित्यत्र विसर्गस्य सत्त्वापवादमुपध्मानीयमाशङ्क्य आह — कस्कादित्वादित्यादि । इतरेतरमिति । इतरः इतरावित्यादीनां द्वित्वे समासवत्त्वात्, सुपोर्लुकि समुदायात्पुनः सुबुत्पत्तिरिति भावः । स्त्रीनपुंसकयोरिति । स्त्रीनपुंसकयोर्विद्यमानानामन्यपरेतरपदानां कर्मव्यतिहारे द्वित्वे उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेरामित्यादेशो बहुलं वक्तव्य इत्यर्थः । अन्योन्यामित्यादि । अन्योन्याम्, अन्योन्यं वा इमे ब्राआहृण्यौ कुले वा भोजयतः, परस्परां परस्परं वा इमे ब्राआहृण्यौ कुले वा भोजयतः । इतरेतराम्, इतरेतरं वा इमे ब्राआहृण्यौ कुले वा भोजयत इत्यन्वयः । तत्रअन्या॑मित्यस्य द्वित्वे 'दलद्वये टाबभाव' इति वक्ष्यमाणतया पुंवत्त्वाट्टापो निवृत्तौ समासवत्त्वाऽभावात्सुपोरलुकि पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेः सुभावे रुत्वेअतो रोरप्लुता॑दित्युत्त्वे आद्गुणे उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेरनेन आम्भावे अन्योन्यामिति रूपम् । आम्भावविरहे तु पुंवत्तद्वाट्टापो निवृत्तौ पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेः सुभावे पुंलिङ्गवदेव अन्योन्यमिति रूपम् । इयं ब्राआहृणी अन्यां ब्राआहृणीं भोजयति, अन्या त्विमामित्येवं विनिमयेन ब्राआहृण्यौ भोजयत इत्यर्थः । इदं कुलं कर्तृ अन्यत्कुलं भोजयति, अन्यत्कुलं कर्तृ इदं कुलमित्येवं विनिमयेन कुले भोजयत इत्यर्थः । अत्राऽन्यच्छब्दस्य नपुंसकलिङ्गस्य द्वित्वे पूर्वपदस्थायाः विभक्तेः सुभावे उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेराम्भावे अन्योन्यामिति रूपम् । आम्भावविरहे तुक्लीबे चाद्ड्विरहः स्वमो॑रिति वक्ष्यमाणतया पुंवत्त्वादद्डादेशाऽभावे अन्योन्यमिति पुंवदेव रूपमिति बोध्यम् । एवं स्त्रीत्वे परामिति पदस्य द्वित्वे दलद्वयेऽपि पुंवत्त्वाट्टापो निवृत्तौ पूर्वोत्तरपदस्थविभक्त्योः क्रमेण सुभावे आम्भावे च परस्परामिति रूपम् । आण्भावविरहे तु द्वित्वे पुंवत्त्वाट्टापो निवृत्तौ पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेः सुभावे परस्परमिति रूपम् । नपुंसकत्वे तु परमित्यस्य द्वित्वे पुंवत्त्वाट्टापो निवृत्तौ पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेः सुभावे उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेराम्भावे परस्पमिति रूपम् । आमभावे तु द्वित्वे पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेः सुभावे परस्परमिति रूपम् । इतरामित्यस्य द्वित्वे पुंवत्त्वाटापो निवृत्तौ उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेराम्भावे समासवत्त्वात्पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेर्लुकि इतरेतरामिति रूपम् । आम्भावविरहे तु इतरेतरमिति रूपम् । नपुंसकस्य तु इतरच्छब्स्य द्वित्वे पुंवत्त्वादद्डादेशविरहे पूर्वपदस्थविभक्तेर्लुकि उत्तरपदस्थविभक्तेराम्भावतदभावाभ्यां रूपद्वयम् । अत्र भाष्यादौ द्वितीयाविभक्त्यन्तस्योदाहरणादितरविभक्तिषु आम्भावो न भवतीति प्राचीनमतमाह — अत्र केचितदिति । तेनेति । द्वितीयेतरविभक्तिषु आम्भावविरहेणेत्यर्थः । पुंवदेवेति । आम्भावविरहे सति बहुमग्रहणात्पुंवत्त्वे टाबभावे प्रथमतृतीयादिविभक्तिषु पुंवदेव रूपम् । नपुंसकत्वे प्रथमतृतीयादिविभक्तिषु आम्भावविरहात्प्रथमैकवचस्य इदं पुंवदेव रूपमित्यर्थः । सिद्धान्तमाह — अन्ये त्विति । दिङ्मात्रत्वादिति । दिक्प्रदर्शनमात्रत्वादित्यर्थः । उपलक्षणत्वादिति यावत् । द्वलद्वये टाबभावः क्लीबे चाद्ड्विरहः स्वमोः । समासे सोरलुक्चेति सिद्धं बाहुलकात्रयम्॥अथाऽत्र बहुलग्रहणानुवृत्तेः प्रयोजनकथनपरप्राचीनश्लोकमाह — दलद्वये इति । स्त्रीलिङ्गेष्वन्यपरेतरशब्देषु कर्मव्यतिहारे द्वित्वे सति पूर्वोत्तरखण्जयोः पुंवत्त्वाट्टाब्निवृत्तिरित्यर्थः । यद्यपि 'इतरेतर' मित्यत्र समासवत्त्वात्सर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे इति पुंवत्त्वादेव पूर्वखण्डे टाबभावः सिद्धस्तथाप्युत्तरखण्डे टाबभावार्थं बाहुलकाश्रयणमिति भावः । क्लीबे इति ।अन्योन्य॑मित्यादावद्डादेशविरह इत्यर्थः । समासे सोरिति । कृतद्वित्वस्य अन्येन समासे पूर्वखण्डस्थस्येत्यर्थः । तथाहीति । यथेदं स्पष्टं भवति, तथा उदाहृत्य प्रदश्र्यत इत्यर्थः । ननु पूर्वदलेसर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्र॑ इति पुंवत्त्वस्याऽत्र न प्रसक्तिरित्यर्थः । कुत इत्यत आह — अन्यपरयोरिति ।समासवच्च बहुल॑मिति समासवत्त्वमितरशब्दमात्रविषयं, न त्वन्यपरहशब्दविषयमिति प्रागुक्तमित्यर्थः । ननु मास्तु समासवत्त्वं, तथापिसर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे॑ इति पुंवत्त्वं दुर्वारम्, द्विर्वचनस्य वृत्तित्वादित्याशङ्क्य निराकरोति — नच द्विर्वचनमेव वृत्तिरिति ।कृत्तद्धितसमासैकशेषसनाद्यन्तधातुरूपाः पञ्च वृत्तयः॑ इति परिगणनादिति भावः । द्विर्वचनस्य वृत्त्यन्तर्भ#आवे बाधकमाह — यां या मिति । द्विर्वचनस्य वृत्त्यन्तर्भावेयांयां प्रियः प्रैक्षत कातराक्षी सासा ह्यिया नम्रमुखी बभूवे॑त्यत्र श्लोके यांयामित्यत्र सासेत्यत्र चसर्वनाम्नो वृत्तिमात्रे॑ इति पूर्वखण्डस्य पुंवत्त्वं स्यादित्यर्थः । क्लीबे चाद्ड्विरहः॑ इत्यस्योदाहरति — अन्योन्यमिति । ननुसमासे सोरलुक् चे॑ति कथम्, अन्यपरशब्दयोः समासवत्त्वाऽभावादित्याशङ्क्य कृत्तद्वित्वस्यान्येन समासे पूर्वखण्डस्थस्य सोरलुगिति तदर्थमभिप्रेत्य तथैवोदाहरति — अन्योन्यसंस,क्तमिति । अन्योऽन्येन संसक्तमिति तृतीयासमासः । अहश्च त्रियामा चेति समाहारद्वन्द्वः । अहश्च रात्रिश्च अन्योन्येन संयुर्तमित्यर्थः । अन्योन्याश्रय इति । अन्योऽन्यस्य आश्रय इति षष्ठीसमासः । परस्पराक्षिसादृश्यमिति । अक्ष्णा सादृस्यमक्षिसादृश्यम् । परस्परस्याऽक्षिरसादृश्यमिति विग्रहः । अपरस्परैरिति । न परस्परे अपरस्परे,तैरिति विग्रहे एषु कृतद्वित्वेषु समासावयवेषु पूर्वखण्डस्थस्य सुबादेशस्य सोर्लुक् प्राप्त इत्यर्थः । सुभावविधानं तु अन्योन्यमित्यादावसमासे चरितार्थमिति भावः । ननु बहुलग्रहणादेतत्समाधेयमित्यत्र किं प्रमाणमित्यत आह — प्रकृतवार्तिकेति ।स्त्रीनपुंसकयो॑रिति प्रकृतवार्तिकेअन्योन्यमिमे ब्राआहृण्य॑विति, 'इतरेतरमिमे कुले' इति चोदाहरणात्दलद्वये टाबभावः क्लीबे चाद्ड्विरहः स्वमो॑रिति विज्ञायते ।स्त्रिया॑मिति सूत्रेअन्योन्यसंश्रयं त्वेत॑दिति बाष्यप्रयोगात्समासे सोरलुगिति विज्ञायत इत्यर्थः ।

Footnotes (NSP 1915 ed.)

NSP p. 339 अन्ये स्विति नादुक्तं बुधैः नान्त्रोदाहरणमादरणीयम्' इति । तदतिरिक्तोदाहरणाभाव इत्येवंपरतयानादरणीयमित्यर्थः । ४२

translator notes

commentary BM: prakāra here means similarity (sādṛśya), on the strength of the tradition's explanation (vyākhyāna); the words taken by 'guṇavacana' are those enumerated in the Bhāṣya on the sūtra 'ā kaḍārāt' (elaborated under 'voto guṇavacanāt'). Followed for 'similarity' in sutra_en and k1.
commentary TB: prakāra denotes both difference (bheda) and similarity (sādṛśya); here similarity is meant, and the tradition's explanation is the only ground for this. It adds the counter-examples agnir māṇavakaḥ, siṃho māṇavakaḥ (quality understood only by secondary usage) and discusses poetic usages. Followed for 'similarity'.
commentary BM: 'tena' = by the treatment as karmadhāraya; after 'puṃvadbhāvaḥ' supply 'by puṃvat karmadhāraya…'. paṭupaṭvī is paṭvī doubled, the prior segment made masculine; though bahuvrīhi-treatment too would give this through 'striyāḥ puṃvat', karmadhāraya-treatment is stated to secure masculine treatment also in words with k before the final (kārikā etc.). paṭupaṭuḥ is the doubled form where ṅīṣ by 'voto guṇavacanāt' is absent, and in the masculine. After paṭusadṛśaḥ supply 'ity arthaḥ'. Followed for the bracketed rule and '[Meaning:]'.
commentary TB: puṃvadbhāva comes from the sūtra 'puṃvat karmadhāraya…', which also applies to words with k before the final (kālakakālikā), so stating karmadhāraya-treatment after bahuvrīhi-treatment is not redundant. Followed for the bracketed rule.
commentary BM: the sentence on guṇopasarjanadravyavācin and kevalaguṇavācin rejects the mistaken view that guṇavacana means only a word for a substance with a subordinate quality; śuklaśuklaṃ rūpam means śuklasadṛśam, i.e. īṣacchuklam, 'slightly white', and likewise śuklaśuklaḥ paṭaḥ. Followed for 'whitish'.
commentary TB: the word rūpam signals that śuklaśuklam here exemplifies a word denoting a quality alone. Followed for the bracket after śuklaśuklaṃ rūpam.
commentary BM: karmadhāraya-treatment does not attach to this vārttika, since the Bhāṣya's example shows no deletion of the sup; hence mūle mūle keeps its seventh-case ending. Gloss: each earlier root-part is thick relative to each later root-part. Followed for the bracketed gloss in k3 and for rendering mūle mūle as two inflected words.
commentary TB: the vārttika is begun because pervasion (vīpsā) is absent: a bamboo stick has one principal root and tip; other parts are 'root' or 'tip' only relatively, and thickness grows toward the root, so vīpsā is impossible. agre agre sūkṣmāḥ should also be cited; in 'mūle mūle pathi viṭapinām' the doubling is for vīpsā. Recorded.
commentary BM: this is a vārttika; saṃbhrama is haste caused by fear and the like; 'anekadhā' makes 'dve' cease (nivṛtti) here; 'yatheṣṭam' permits even a single use, since the use of words ends in producing understanding; with no karmadhāraya-treatment there is no deletion of the sup, as in the Bhāṣya's example. Followed for '[and not two times only]'.
commentary TB on nyāyasiddha: as many words should be used as the addressee needs to grasp the meaning. Recorded; the English keeps 'established by reasoning'.
commentary BM: 'kriyāsamabhihāre ca' is a vārttika; supply 'dve staḥ'. kriyāsamabhihāra is repetition (paunaḥpunya) and intensity (bhṛśatva). It concerns only loṭ forms, the Bhāṣya on 'kriyāsamabhihāre loṭ loṭo hisvau vā ca tadhvamoḥ' reading 'kriyāsamabhihāre loṭ-madhyamapuruṣa-ekavacanasya dve bhavataḥ'. lunīhi: lūñ 'to cut' + loṭ, hi substituted, vikaraṇa śnā; doubled by this vārttika; anuprayoga lunāti by 'yathāvidhy anuprayogaḥ pūrvasmin'. The doubled word means intense or repeated cutting, the anuprayoga cutting by one agent; iti conveys identity; net sense: intensified cutting by a single agent. Followed for the bracketed 'dve' and the gloss.
commentary BM: nityavīpsayoḥ already gives doubling for repetition, so this vārttika is for intensity. Objection: then 'bhṛśe ca' would have sufficed and 'kriyāsamabhihāre' is useless. Answer ('paunaḥpunye 'pi'): it is for joint signification of repetition by loṭ and doubling; otherwise, loṭ alone having signified repetition, doubling by nityavīpsayoḥ would not apply. Hence no doubling in yaṅ forms such as pāpacyate. Followed for '[doubling in the sense of repetition]' and '[doubling]'.
commentary TB: objection: by the same reasoning yaṅ-forms should be doubled jointly with yaṅ (pāpacyate pāpacyate, bobhūyate bobhūyate). Answer: loṭ does not always mean kriyāsamabhihāra (it also occurs for samuccaya), so loṭ and doubling together signify it; yaṅ never deviates from it and signifies it without doubling, so a yaṅ-form is not doubled. Recorded; consistent with BM.
commentary BM: karmavyatihāra = exchange of action (kriyāvinimaya); 'bahulam' construes only with 'samāsavat'; the doubling itself is obligatory. Followed: bahulam is attached only to the compound-treatment.
commentary TB: the doubling is obligatory; the bāhulaka belongs to compound-treatment only. Followed.
commentary BM: the Bhāṣya's examples show anya without and itara with compound-treatment; the vārttika usage 'parasparopapadāc ca' shows para without it. On the strength of bahula, sarvanāmans other than these three do not undergo this doubling at all. BM first phrases the point as 'for anya and para compound-treatment is bahulam' and later as 'compound-treatment is confined to itara'. Recorded; the English follows the kaumudī's flat 'na samāsavat'.
commentary BM: this vārttika concerns anya and para only, itara being always compound-like; 'sup' is the pratyāhāra, so for any of the seven vibhaktis in the prior member su (first-case singular) is the substitute. Some hold that this doubling etc. is for the first-case singular only; that contradicts the Bhāṣya, which gives second-case and other examples, so Bhaṭṭoji cites those. Followed for 'a sup' (any sup ending).
commentary TB: some said the su-substitution is only for second-case and later endings, that in the latter half too only those occur (not the first case), and only in the singular; that is un-Pāṇinian, not stated in the Bhāṣya, and Bhaṭṭoji hints at this by citing other numbers: anyonyau, anyonyān. Recorded; TB describes the rejected view differently from BM.
commentary BM: anyam anyau etc. are doubled and the prior sup becomes su as before; Māgha's usage shows the first-case-singular-only view is not accepted by poets; 'kaskāditvāt' answers the expectation of upadhmānīya, the exception to s; itaretaram: itaraḥ itarau etc. doubled, both sups deleted by compound-treatment, and a sup added afresh to the whole. Recorded; the kaumudī gives no derivation.
commentary TB: Māgha's usage accords with the Bhāṣya, showing that poets too disregard the later view; Bhāravi's 'kṛtaniketam adṛṣṭaparasparaiḥ' (vigraha: adṛṣṭaḥ parasparo yaiḥ) would not be established if the su-substitution excluded the first case. Recorded.
commentary BM: each pair is construed with 'ime brāhmaṇyau kule vā bhojayataḥ': this brahmin woman (or family) feeds the other and the other this one, so the two feed each other by exchange; BM gives derivations for each form (e.g. anyonyām: ṭāp removed by masculine treatment, no sup-luk, prior sup → su, ru, u, guṇa, latter ending → ām). 'atra kecit' is the older view; 'tena' = no ām outside the second case, so first, third and later cases are as in the masculine; 'anye tu' gives the settled view (siddhānta), 'diṅmātra' meaning 'merely indicative'. Followed for the gloss 'feed each other'.
commentary TB: with 'atra kecit' Bhaṭṭoji refines an older text that gave masculine forms for the third and later cases in feminine and neuter; 'anye tu' states the actual position; no ṭāp in anyonyam even without ām, by bāhulaka. Recorded; the English of 'kecit' and 'anye' stays neutral.
commentary BM: the verse is an older one (prācīna śloka) stating the purpose of carrying 'bahula' into this vārttika. 'daladvaye': in feminine anya, para, itara doubled for exchange, ṭāp goes from both segments by masculine treatment (for itaretaram the prior segment already gets it from 'sarvanāmno vṛttimātre', so bāhulaka is needed for the latter segment); 'klībe': no adḍ substitute (adḍādeśa) in anyonyam etc.; 'samāse soḥ': in a compound of the doubled form with another word, [aluk] of the su standing in the prior segment. Followed for the brackets in the verse.
commentary BM: 'sarvanāmno vṛttimātre' does not apply because anya and para lack compound-treatment; doubling is not a vṛtti since the vṛttis are counted as five (kṛt, taddhita, samāsa, ekaśeṣa, sanādyanta dhātu); if it were, 'yāṃ yāṃ … sā sā (hriyā namramukhī babhūva)' would get masculine treatment of the prior segment. Vigrahas: anyonyena saṃsaktam, ahaś ca triyāmā ca (samāhāra-dvandva); anyonyasya āśrayaḥ; parasparasya akṣisādṛśyam; na parasparāḥ aparasparāḥ, taiḥ. In these compound members luk of the su standing in the prior segment is due; the su-rule has its scope in uncompounded anyonyam. The authorities: the Bhāṣya's examples 'anyonyam ime brāhmaṇyau', 'itaretaram ime kule' and 'anyonyasaṃśrayaṃ tv etat' under 'striyām'. Followed for '[supplies]', '[that would give]' and '[standing in the prior segment]'.
commentary TB on 'atiprasaṅgāt': masculine treatment cannot be based on treating doubling as a vṛtti (as ekaśeṣa is barred), since that conflicts with usage and with the Bhāṣya's 'yāṃ yāṃ manyeta sā bhavet' under 'akathitaṃ ca'; the moderns (navya) call the poetic 'sā sā' improper. On 'sor luk ca prāptaḥ': the su-substitution has its scope in bare anyonyam, parasparam. Recorded.
textual The digital source reads 'ity antodātatvaṃ' (a t dropped); NSP p. 338 (printed 328) reads 'ity antodāttatvaṃ' (scan; collation batch19 row A, Wikisource agrees with the print). English follows the print.
textual The digital source reads 'ānupūrvye dve aācye'' (garbled: v lost, broken a + ā sequence, stray apostrophe). NSP p. 339 (printed 329) reads 'ānupūrvye dve vācye' (scan; collation row A, Wikisource agrees). English follows the print ('should be stated').
textual The digital source prefixes the tag '(vārttikam)' to k3, k5, k7, k9, k11 and k13, and places it after 'kriyāsamabhihāre ca' within k5. The tags are editorial: NSP p. 339 marks each vārttika (ānupūrvye…, saṃbhrameṇa…, kriyāsamabhihāre ca, karmavyatihāre…, asamāsavadbhāve…, strīnapuṃsakayoḥ…) with a sign before it (scan). They are not rendered; the vārttikas themselves carry the label. The print sets 'kriyāsamabhihāre ca' as a vārttika like its siblings, whereas the digital source keeps it inside a prose block (collation row M); the English labels it inline.
textual The digital source reads 'sarpa sarva, budhyasva budhyasva'; 'sarva' is a slip for 'sarpa' (collation row A: both witnesses repeat the same word), and the English gives 'sarpa sarpa'. NSP p. 339 reads 'sarpaḥ sarpaḥ budhyasva 2 | sarpaḥ 3 budhyasva 3', with visarga and numerals for the repetitions (scan); Wikisource has 'sarpa' without visarga, as ours (collation row V). The English follows our reading. Also 'samu[virāma]itya' (digital, the c of cc lost) = 'samuccitya' (NSP, scan; Wikisource agrees; collation row A).
textual The digital source reads 'pūrvapadasthasya supaṃ sur vaktavyaḥ'. 'supaṃ' is a slip for 'supaḥ' (NSP p. 339, scan; Wikisource agrees; collation row A); English follows 'supaḥ'. NSP reads 'pūrvapadasya' for 'pūrvapadasthasya' (collation row V, Wikisource as ours); the sense is the same, and BM paraphrases 'pūrvapadasthānām'.
textual The digital source writes 'anyo'nya-' with avagraha; NSP p. 339 prints 'anyonya-' throughout (scan). 'anyo'nyasmai' is confirmed by the scan ('anyonyasmai'; the OCR's '-syai' is a misreading).
textual The digital source reads 'āmbhāvo vā vaktavyaḥ'; NSP p. 339 reads 'āmbhāvo vaktavyaḥ' without 'vā' (scan); Wikisource has 'vā', as ours (collation row V). The English keeps 'optionally'; the paired examples in k11 show optionality either way, and BM paraphrases 'bahulaṃ vaktavyaḥ'.
textual The digital source reads 'sarvavibhaktīnām ādeśam āhuḥ'; NSP p. 339 reads 'sarvavibhaktīnām āmādeśam āhuḥ' (scan); Wikisource as ours (collation row V). The English follows ours and marks the contextually understood ām with brackets: 'the [ām] substitute'. NSP also numbers the verse '|| 1 ||' (collation row M).
textual NSP footnote, printed under sk.2147.n1 (p. 339), on TB's 'anye tv iti': the learned have said 'the example is not to be regarded as binding here', i.e. not binding in the sense of implying that there are no other examples. It bears on the kaumudī's 'udāharaṇasya diṅmātratvāt'.
textual The digital source splits 'na ca | sarvanāmno vṛttimātre (vārttikam) || iti puṃvadbhāvaḥ' across k11–k13, making the middle a vārttika block. NSP p. 339 prints continuously 'na ca sarvanāmno vṛttimātre puṃvadbhāvaḥ', with no vārttika sign and no 'iti' (scan): there the whole phrase is Bhaṭṭoji's citation of the vārttika 'sarvanāmno vṛttimātre puṃvadbhāvaḥ'. Wikisource agrees with ours (collation rows V and M). The English follows the block division and renders the phrase as a cited vārttika.
textual Divergences from NSP pp. 339–340 (scan), each a collation row V where Wikisource agrees with ours: digital 'kātarākṣī' vs NSP 'kātarākṣīṃ'; digital 'aparasparaiḥ' vs NSP 'adṛṣṭaparasparaiḥ' (BM reads and analyses 'aparasparaiḥ'; TB elsewhere quotes Bhāravi's 'adṛṣṭaparasparaiḥ'); digital 'bāhulakabalena' vs NSP 'bāhulakena'; digital 'anyo'nyasaṃśrayaṃ tv etad' vs NSP 'anyonyasaṃśrayatve tad' (BM reads 'anyonyasaṃśrayaṃ tv etad'; the NSP form is likely a misprint). The English follows the digital text each time; none changes the argument.
commentary BM (on SK 2140): 'sarvasya' is a sixth case of place and 'dve' supplies the substitutes, with 'śabdarūpe' ('two word-forms') understood as its qualificand; against the reading 'dve uccāraṇe staḥ' ('there are two utterances'), under which taddhitas such as paunaḥpunika could not arise, BM concludes that the substitution view is the better (ādeśapakṣa eva śreyān). Followed for 'two [word-forms]' in sutra_en, k1, k2, k5 and k6.
commentary TB (on SK 2140): the view that doubling is substitution (sthāne dvirvacana) is the principal one. Followed for 'two [word-forms] … in place of' in sutra_en.
translator The bracketed 'dve' in sutra_en is not a translator's guess: the kaumudī's own 'dve staḥ' in k1 (and 'dve vācye' in the vārttikas of k2 and k6) states it, and its source is the adhikāra 'sarvasya dve' ('ity adhikṛtya', SK 2139). 'Word-forms' rather than 'utterances' follows BM and TB above, as in the other units of this prakaraṇa.

SK 2148 · A 8.1.13V

अकृच्छ्रे प्रियसुखयोरन्यतरस्याम् ॥ २१४८ ॥

akṛcchre priyasukhayoranyatarasyām

akṛcchre priyasukhayor anyatarasyām — [Two word-forms come in place of the whole — by the adhikāra of SK 2139 —] optionally, of priya and sukha when [they denote] absence of hardship (akṛcchra) [and the doubled word is treated like a karmadhāraya — by the adhikāra of SK 2146].

Rule. Priya "dear" and sukha "easy" are optionally doubled when they denote absence of hardship (akṛcchra), ease. The doubled form is treated like a karmadhāraya, by the heading SK 2146.

Example.

priyeṇa priyeṇa → treated like a karmadhāraya: both third-case endings deleted by luk → priya priya

→ the same ending again after the whole → priyapriyeṇa dadāti.

Or, undoubled: priyeṇa dadāti.

Likewise sukhasukhena dadāti, or sukhena dadāti.

Bhaṭṭoji gives the meaning: "he gives even a very dear thing without effort".

Applies when / blocked by. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators glosses kṛcchra as hardship and akṛcchra as ease. He says the karmadhāraya treatment comes from the heading SK 2146. It does not come from the words "like a compound" in Vārttika 4 of SK 2147, since that is only a vārttika.

Watch out. The doubling is optional (anyatarasyām). Both priyapriyeṇa dadāti and priyeṇa dadāti are correct.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

प्रियप्रियेण ददाति । प्रियेण वा । सुखसुखेन ददाति । सुखेन वा । द्विर्वचने कर्मधारयवद्भावात्सुपि लुकि तदेव वचनम् । अतिप्रियमपि वस्त्वनायासेन ददातीत्यर्थः ॥

priyapriyeṇa dadāti, or priyeṇa [dadāti]; sukhasukhena dadāti, or sukhena [dadāti]. In the doubling, because of the treatment as a karmadhāraya (karmadhārayavad-bhāva), when luk of the sup has taken place, the same ending (vacana) [comes again after the whole]: priyeṇa priyeṇa → priya priya (luk of both sup affixes) → priyapriyeṇa (the same ending after the whole); likewise sukhasukhena. The meaning is: 'he gives even a very dear thing without effort'.

Bālamanoramā

अकृच्छ्रे प्रियसुखयोरन्यतरस्याम् - अकृच्छ्रे । कृच्छ्रं-कष्टम् । अकृच्छ्रम्-अनायासः । तस्मिन्वर्तमानयोः प्रिय सुख इत्यनयोद्र्वे वा स्तः । कर्मधारयवद्भावादिति ।कर्मधारयवदुत्तरेषु॑ इत्यधिकारादिति भावः ।समासवच्च बहुल॑मित्यतः समासवदित्यनुवृत्तिस्तु न शङ्क्या, तस्य वार्तिकस्थत्वात्, एवं चप्रियेणे॑त्यस्यसुखेने॑त्यस्य च द्वित्वे सति कर्मधारयवत्त्वात्सुपोस्तृतीयैकवचनयोर्लुकि पुनः समुदायात्तृतीयैकवचनमिति फलितम् ।

translator notes

commentary BM: kṛcchra is hardship (kaṣṭa), akṛcchra is ease (anāyāsa); for priya and sukha occurring in that sense two [word-forms] come optionally. The karmadhārayavad-bhāva comes from the adhikāra 'karmadhārayavad uttareṣu' (SK 2146); 'samāsavat' is not to be thought carried forward from 'samāsavac ca bahulam', since that is in a vārttika. Followed for the bracketed karmadhāraya clause in sutra_en.
commentary BM: when priyeṇa and sukhena are doubled, by karmadhārayavattva the two third-case singular endings undergo luk and the third-case singular again comes after the whole. Followed for 'the same ending (vacana)' and for the forms priyeṇa priyeṇa and priya priya in the derivation, which are BM's.
textual Ours reads '…karmadhārayavadbhāvāt supi luki tad eva vacanam'; NSP p. 340 (scan) reads '…karmadhārayavadbhāvāt subluki punas tad eva vacanam' ('when luk of the sup [has taken place], the same ending again'); the p43 scan collation (batch19, class V) notes that Wikisource agrees with ours. The English gives the sense common to both; the print's 'again' (punaḥ) is carried by the bracketed '[comes again after the whole]'.
textual No TB on this sūtra: NSP p. 340 (scan) passes from the TB on SK 2147 ('sorluk ca prāpta iti') directly to SK 2149 ('yo 'yam ātmetyādi').

SK 2149 · A 8.1.14V

यथास्वे यथायथम् ॥ २१४९ ॥

yathāsve yathāyatham

yathāsve yathāyatham — In the sense of yathāsva ('each according to what is its own'), [the form] yathāyatham [is established by nipātana].

Rule. In the sense of yathāsva, "each according to what is its own", the form yathāyatham is fixed by nipātana.

Bhaṭṭoji first explains yathāsvam. It is an avyayībhāva compound in the sense of pervasion. Its meaning is "whatever is one's self, and whatever belongs to oneself". In that sense two things are fixed by nipātana: the doubling of the word yathā, and neuter gender.

Example.

yathā → doubled by nipātana → yathā yathā

→ neuter gender, fixed by nipātana; so the final vowel is short (one of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators)

→ yathāyatham.

yathāyathaṃ jñātā "one who knows [things] each according to its own nature". Bhaṭṭoji gives the meaning as yathāsvabhāvam "according to its own nature", or yathātmīyam "according to what belongs to it".

Applies when / blocked by. Why must the doubling be fixed by nipātana? Why does SK 2140 not give it? One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators answers. SK 2140 doubles a word only when the word itself names its object as qualified by totality. Otherwise sarva "all" in sarvo ghaṭaḥ "the whole pot" would be doubled too. Yathā does not work that way here. The editor of the printed edition says the same in a footnote.

Why the neuter? The same commentator explains. Being an avyaya, the form would otherwise have no gender at all. The neuter gives it a gender, and with it the short final vowel.

Why is yathāyatham in the second case with jñātā, not the sixth? Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both answer. Jñātā ends in the agent affix tṛn, so SK 627 bars the sixth case. One of them adds that with the affix tṛc it would be yathāyathasya jñātā.

Watch out. Sva can mean self, one's own, a kinsman, or wealth. One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators says that here only the first two are meant, by the tradition's explanation.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

यथास्वम् इति वीप्सायामव्ययीभावः । योऽयमात्मा यच्चात्मीयं तद्यथास्वम् । तस्मिन्यथाशब्दस्य द्वे क्लीबत्वं च निपात्यते । यथायथं ज्ञाता । यथास्वभावमित्यर्थः । यथात्मीयमिति वा ॥

yathāsvam is an avyayībhāva in [the sense of] pervasion (vīpsā): whatever is one's self (ātman) and whatever belongs to oneself (ātmīya), that is yathāsvam. In that [sense], the doubling of the word yathā and neuter gender are established by nipātana. yathāyathaṃ jñātā ('one who knows [things] each according to its own nature'): the meaning is 'according to its own nature (yathāsvabhāvam)', or 'according to what belongs to it (yathātmīyam)'.

Bālamanoramā

यथास्वे यथायथम् - यथास्वे यथायथम् । वीप्सायामिति । कार्त्स्न्येसंबन्धो वीप्सेत्युक्तम् । स्वशब्दार्थगतकार्त्स्न्ये द्योत्ये यथाशब्दस्य स्वशब्देनाऽव्ययीभाव इत्यर्थः । कृत्स्न श्चासौ स्वश्चेत्यस्वपदविग्रहः, नित्यसमासत्वात् । स्वशब्दस्तु आत्मात्मीयज्ञातिधनवाची । इह तु आत्मात्मीयवाच्येव गृह्रते, नतु ज्ञातिधनवाची, व्याख्यानादित्यभिप्रेत्य विग्रहवाक्यस्य फलितमर्थमाह — द्वे इति । 'स्त' इति शेषः । निपातनादिति भावः । न चनित्यवीप्सयो॑रित्येव वीप्सया द्वित्वमिह सिद्धमिति शङ्क्यम्, द्वित्वविषयस्य शब्दस्य लक्षणया कार्त्स्न्यविशिष्टे वृत्तावेव वीप्सायां द्विर्वचनविधानात् । अन्यथा 'सर्वो घटः' इत्यादौ सर्वशब्दस्यापि द्वित्वापत्तेरिति भावः । क्लीबत्वमिति ।यथा-यथा इति समुदायस्ये॑ति शेषः । अन्यथा अव्ययत्वादलिङ्गत्वं स्यादिति भावः । एवं च कृत्तद्वित्वस्य नपुंसकह्रस्वत्वं च फलितम् । यथायथं ज्ञातेति । अत्रज्ञाते॑ति तृन्नन्तम् ।तद्योगेन लोके॑ति षष्ठीनिषेधात्कर्मणि द्वितीया । तृजन्तत्वे तुयथायथस्य ज्ञाते॑त्येव ।

translator notes

commentary BM: vīpsā was said [on SK 2140] to be relation to totality; when totality of what sva denotes is to be made manifest, yathā forms an avyayībhāva with sva, analysed with other words (kṛtsnaś cāsau svaś ca), since it is a constant compound (nityasamāsa). sva denotes self, one's own, kinsman and wealth; here only self and one's own are taken, by the explanation (vyākhyāna). Followed for 'whatever is one's self … belongs to oneself'.
commentary BM: the doubling is not already obtained by 'nityavīpsayoḥ', since that doubling applies only when the word itself denotes [its object] qualified by totality; otherwise sarva in 'sarvo ghaṭaḥ' would be doubled too. Neuter gender is of the whole yathā-yathā; otherwise, being an avyaya, it would have no gender; hence the neuter short vowel [in yathāyatham]. Recorded; consistent with 'established by nipātana'.
commentary BM: jñātā ends in tṛn, so with it the sixth case is barred by 'na lokāvyaya…' and the second case stands; with tṛc it would be 'yathāyathasya jñātā'. Followed for rendering jñātā as 'one who knows'.
commentary TB, printed under sk.2147.t1: on 'yo 'yam ātmā…', ātman and ātmīya are both denoted by sva; on yathāyatham, the sixth case with jñātā is barred by 'na lokā…' since jñātā ends in tṛn; yathāsvabhāvam gives the sense of yathāyatham meaning 'yo ya ātmā', citing Amara, which lists svabhāva among the meanings of ātman. Recorded; consistent with the English.
textual NSP footnote 1, p. 340 (scan), on 'dve': 'vīpsāyāṃ yathāśabdasyāvṛtter dvitvāprāptyā tad api nipātyate', i.e. since in vīpsā the word yathā does not function [in that sense] (a-vṛtti), doubling would not be obtained, so that too is established by nipātana. This footnote is not in our editorial_notes. The p43 scan collation (batch19) reports SK 2149 clean.
translator In the NSP footnote, 'yathāśabdasyāvṛtteḥ' is divided as a-vṛtteḥ ('non-functioning'), not āvṛtteḥ ('repetition'), which would contradict 'dvitvāprāptyā'. The reading agrees with BM's point that 'nityavīpsayoḥ' doubles only a word that itself denotes its object as qualified by totality.

SK 2150 · A 8.1.15V

द्वन्द्वं रहस्यमर्यादावचनव्युत्क्रमणयज्ञपात्रप्रयोगाभिव्यक्तिषु ॥ २१५० ॥

dvandvaṃ rahasyamaryādāvacanavyutkramaṇayajñapātraprayogābhivyaktiṣu

dvandvaṃ rahasyamaryādāvacanavyutkramaṇayajñapātraprayogābhivyaktiṣu — [The form] dvandvam [is established by nipātana] in [the senses of] a secret (rahasya), [and when] a limit (maryādā) [is] expressed, separation (vyutkramaṇa), the employment of sacrificial vessels (yajñapātraprayoga) and manifestation (abhivyakti).

Rule. The form dvandvam is fixed by nipātana in five senses. They are a secret (rahasya), a limit expressed (maryādāvacana), separation (vyutkramaṇa), the use of sacrificial vessels (yajñapātraprayoga), and manifestation (abhivyakti).

Bhaṭṭoji lists what nipātana fixes. The word dvi "two" is doubled. The final of the first member is replaced by am. The final of the second member is replaced by a. And the whole is neuter.

Example.

dvau dvau "two, two" → treated like a karmadhāraya by the heading SK 2146: both endings deleted → dvi dvi

→ am for the final i of the first member, by nipātana → dvam dvi

→ a for the final i of the second member, by nipātana → dvandva (the m becomes n before d; the sources do not state this step)

→ neuter, treated as singular; a case-ending comes after the whole

→ after a neuter stem in a, SK 309 replaces su (and am) with am → dvandvam.

Do not confuse the two *am*s. The first replaces the final of dvi and is fixed by nipātana. The second replaces the case-ending, by SK 309.

Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both give the karmadhāraya step. One of them reads the singular treatment, and so SK 309, from the word ca in Bhaṭṭoji's list.

Of the five senses, only a secret is what the word dvandva denotes (vācya), Bhaṭṭoji says. The other four are domains (viṣaya) in which it is used.

A secret. dvandvaṃ mantrayate "he takes counsel in secret". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators gives the thought behind it: "two by two, for so it is secret".
A limit expressed. Bhaṭṭoji defines maryādā as not overstepping an established bound. ācaturaṃ hīme paśavo dvandvaṃ mithunīyanti "for these animals, up to the fourth [generation], desire to mate pair by pair". The mother mates with the son, and also with the grandson and great-grandson, taking the fourth as the limit.

Ācaturam "up to the fourth" is an avyayībhāva by SK 667, with the closing affix ṭac (SK 677). Bhaṭṭoji's commentators both say so. One of them reads the ā as inclusive: "up to and including the fourth". Mithunīyanti "they desire mating" takes the affix kyac, which makes a verb meaning "to desire" something.

Separation. Bhaṭṭoji defines vyutkramaṇa as standing apart. dvandvaṃ vyutkrāntāḥ "they have separated in pairs": they stand apart through their connection with two groups.
Use of sacrificial vessels. dvandvaṃ yajñapātrāṇi prayunakti "he sets out the sacrificial vessels in pairs". One of Bhaṭṭoji's commentators names such vessels: the wooden sword (sphya) and the potsherds (kapāla).
Manifestation. dvandvaṃ saṅkarṣaṇavāsudevau "Saṅkarṣaṇa and Vāsudeva are a pair". Bhaṭṭoji glosses: through their constant association (sāhacarya). One of his commentators adds that they are known in the world through it.

Applies when / blocked by. Bhaṭṭoji adds a last line. By yogavibhāga, splitting the rule so that dvandvam stands as a rule of its own, the form is accepted elsewhere too. Bhaṭṭoji's commentators give examples.

dvandvāni sahate "he bears the pairs" (both commentators). One of them names the pairs: heat and cold, pleasure and pain, hunger and thirst.

dvandvaṃ yuddhaṃ pravartate "a fight goes on, two by two", with doubling for pervasion (the other commentator).

Watch out. Two places here follow the printed edition over our text.

Our text of the Kaumudī reads dvandvaṃ yajñapātrāṇi payunakti. The 1915 printed edition reads prayunakti "he sets out". We follow the print.
Our text of the Kaumudī ends with dvandvam iṣyate "dvandvam is accepted [elsewhere too]". The 1915 printed edition adds two closing lines. The first is iti dvirukta-prakriyā, "thus the section on doubling". The second is the colophon of the first half: iti śrībhaṭṭojidīkṣitaviracitāyāṃ siddhāntakaumudyāṃ pūrvārdhaṃ samāptam, "thus ends the first half of the Siddhānta-kaumudī composed by Śrī Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita". We follow the print.

Keep the senses apart as well. Dvandvam denotes only "in secret". In the other four senses the same form is used, but it does not name that sense.

Siddhānta-kaumudī

द्विशब्दस्य द्विर्वचनं पूर्वपदस्य अम्भावोऽत्वं चोत्तरपदस्य नपुंसकत्वं च निपात्यते एष्वर्थेषु । तत्र रहस्यं द्वन्द्वशब्दस्य वाच्यम् । इतरे विषयभूताः । द्वन्द्वं मन्त्रयते । रहस्यमित्यर्थः । मर्यादा स्थित्यनतिक्रमः । आचतुरं हीमे पशवो द्वन्द्वं मिथुनीयन्ति । माता पुत्रेण मिथुनं गच्छति । पौत्रेण प्रपौत्रेणापि मर्यादीकृत्य । व्युत्क्रमणं पृथगवस्थानम् । द्वन्द्वं व्युत्क्रान्ताः द्विवर्गसम्बन्धेन पृथगवस्थिताः । द्वन्द्वं यज्ञपात्राणि पयुनक्ति । द्वन्द्वं सङ्कर्षणवासुदेवौ । अभिव्यक्तौ साहचर्येणेत्यर्थः । योगविभागादन्यत्रापि द्वन्द्वमिष्यते ॥

In these senses, the doubling of the word dvi, am for [the final of] the first member, a for [the final of] the second member, and neuter gender are established by nipātana. Of these, a secret (rahasya) is what the word dvandva denotes (vācya); the others are its domains (viṣaya).

dvandvaṃ mantrayate: the meaning is '[he takes counsel] in secret (rahasyam)'.

maryādā is not overstepping an established bound (sthiti). ācaturaṃ hīme paśavo dvandvaṃ mithunīyanti ('for these animals, up to the fourth [generation], desire to mate pair by pair'): the mother comes to mating with the son, and also with the grandson and the great-grandson, taking [the fourth] as the limit (maryādīkṛtya).

vyutkramaṇa is standing apart. dvandvaṃ vyutkrāntāḥ ('they have separated in pairs'): they stand apart through their connection with two groups.

dvandvaṃ yajñapātrāṇi prayunakti ('he employs the sacrificial vessels in pairs').

dvandvaṃ saṅkarṣaṇavāsudevau ('Saṅkarṣaṇa and Vāsudeva are a pair'): in [the sense of] abhivyakti; the meaning is 'through [their] constant association (sāhacarya)'.

By splitting the rule (yogavibhāga), dvandva is accepted elsewhere too. [1915 print: Thus the section on doubling (dviruktaprakriyā). Thus ends the first half (pūrvārdha) of the Siddhānta-kaumudī composed by Śrī Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita.]

Tattvabodhinī

alignment inferredNSP p. 340

—द्वन्द्वं मन्त्रयते इति । द्वौद्वौ भूत्वा मन्त्रयेते इत्यर्थः एवं हि तद् रहस्यं भवति ॥—आचतुरमिति । ‘आज्जयादाभिविध्योः’ इत्यव्ययीभावः । ‘अव्ययीभावे शरत्प्रभृतिभ्यः’ इति टच् । चतुःशब्दोऽत्र चतुर्णां पूरणे द्रष्टव्यः । आ चतुर्थादित्यर्थः ॥—द्वन्द्वं यज्ञपात्राणीति । ‘स्फ्यश्च कपालानि च’ इत्यादीनि पात्राणि द्वन्द्वं प्रयुनक्ति । आसादयतीत्यर्थः ॥—अभिव्यक्तौ साहचर्येणेत्यर्थ इति । अत्र द्वन्द्वमित्यत्र स्वार्थं द्विर्वचनम् । एकवद्भावादिकं तु पूर्ववत् ॥—अन्यत्रापीति । ‘द्वन्द्वं युद्धं प्रवर्तते’ । इह वीप्सायां द्विर्वचनम् । द्वयोर्द्वयोर्युद्धमित्यर्थः ॥ ‘द्वन्द्वानि सहते’ शीतमुष्णमेकं द्वन्द्वं सुखदुःखे चापरं क्षत्रृष्णे चापरम् । इह स्वार्थं द्विर्वचनमेक-वद्भावादि पूर्ववत् । वहुत्वं त्वेकशेषवशात् ॥ सिद्धान्तकौमुदीव्याख्याया कृता तत्त्वबोधिनी ॥ समाप्तं तत्र पूर्वार्धं तेन तुष्यतु शंकरः ॥ इति श्रीपरमहंसपरिव्राजकाचार्यवामनेन्द्रस्वामिचरणारविन्दसेवकज्ञानेन्द्रसरस्वतीकृतौ सिद्धान्तकौमुदीव्याख्यायां तत्त्वबोधिन्याख्यायां पूर्वार्धं संपूर्णम्

Bālamanoramā

द्वन्द्वं रहस्यमर्यादावचनव्युत्क्रमण- यज्ञपात्रप्रयोगाभिव्यक्तिषु - द्वन्द्वं रहस्य । पूर्वपदस्येति । द्वौ द्वाविति द्वित्वे कर्मधारयत्त्वात्सुब्लुकि समुदायात्पुनः सुपि पूर्वपदावयवस्य इकारस्यअ॑मिति मकारान्तादेश इत्यर्थः । अत्वमिति । उत्तरपदस्य अकारोऽन्तादेश इत्यर्थः । न च त्यदाद्यत्वमुत्तरपदान्तस्य सिद्धमिति वाच्यं, संज्ञात्वात्तदप्राप्तेरित्याहुः । नपुंसकत्वं चेति । चकारोऽनुक्तसमुच्चये । कृत्तद्वित्वस्य नपुंसकत्वं द्विवचनाऽभावश्चेत्यर्थः । आचतुरं हीति । आङभिविधौ ।आङ्भर्यादे॑त्यव्ययीभावः । शरत्प्रभृतित्वाट्टच् । चतुर्थान्तमिति फलितोऽर्थः । पशवः स्वप्रभृति चतुर्थपर्यन्तं द्वन्द्वं मिथुनीयन्तीत्यन्वयः । मिथनशब्देन मैथुनं विवक्षितम् । मिथुनस्य कर्म मैथुनम् । तदिच्छतीत्यर्थे 'सुप आत्मनः' इति क्यच् । फलितमर्थमाह — मिथुन गच्छतीति । मिथुनत्वं प्राप्नोतीत्यर्थः । मिथुनायन्ते इति क्यङ्पाठस्तु प्रामादिकः मर्यादीकृत्येति । स्वप्रभृति चतुरोऽभिव्याप्येत्यर्थः । अत्यन्तसहचरितत्वेन लोकविज्ञानमभिव्यक्तिरिति भाष्याल्लभ्यते । तदाह — सहचर्येणेत्यर्थ इति । अत्रद्वन्द्वं न्यञ्ची॑त्यत्र वीप्सायां द्वित्वम्, अन्यत्र स्वार्थे इति बोध्यम् । अन्यत्रापीति । 'द्वन्द्व#आनि सहते' इत्यादावित्यर्थः । शीतमुष्णं च एकं द्वन्द्वम् । सुखं दुःखं चापरम् । क्षुत्तृष्णाचान्यत् । इह स्वार्थे द्वन्द्वः । अम्भावादि पूर्ववत् । 'चार्थे द्वन्द्वः' इति निपातनादन्यत्रापीति सिद्धम् ।**** इति द्विरुक्तप्रकरणम् ।****इति श्रीमत्सन्ततसन्तन्यमानश्येनकूर्मषोडशाररथचक्राकारादिबहुगुणविराजमानप्रौढापरिमितमहाध्वरस्यश्रीशाहजी तुक्वोजी भोसल॑ चोलमहीमिहेन्द्रामात्यधुरन्धरस्य श्रीमत आनन्दरायविद्वत्सार्वभौमस्याध्वर्यणा पञ्चपुरुषीपोष्येण, बाल्य एव तद्दयानिर्वर्तितताऽपरिमिताग्निविजृम्भितवाजपेयसर्वपृष्ठाप्तोर्यामप्रमुखमखसन्तर्पितशतमखप्रमुखबर्हिर्मुखेन, पदवाक्यप्रमाणपारावारपारीणाग्रजन्मविओआवाजपेययाजितो लब्धविद्यावैशद्येन, अध्वरमीमांसाकुतूहलवृत्तिनिर्माणप्रकटितसर्वतन्त्रस्वातन्त्र्येण, बौधायनापस्तम्बसत्याषाढभावद्वाजकात्यायनाआलायनद्राह्रायणादिकल्पसूत्रतद्भाष्यपारीणमहादेवववाजपेययाजिसुतेन, अन्नुपूर्णाम्बागर्भजातेन, वासुदेवदीक्षितविदुषा विरचितायां सिद्धान्तकौमुदीव्याख्यायां बालमनोरमायां पूर्वार्धम् ।****************************अथ एकशेषप्रकरणम्*****अथैकशेषो निरूप्यते । तदेवं द्वन्द्वे निरूपिते तदपवादमेकशेषप्रकरणमारभते — अथैकशेष इति । 'निरूप्यते' इति शेषः । तत्रैकशेषसूत्राणि व्याचिख्यासुः पूर्वं व्याख्यातमपि सूत्रं सन्दर्भशुद्धये आह — सरूपाणामिति । तदुदाहरणमपि स्मारयति — रामौ रामा इति । विरुपाणामिति ।सरूपाणा॑मित्यनेन सूत्रेणार्थ भेदेऽपि शब्दैकरूप्ये एकशेष उक्तः, एकार्थकत्वे विरूपाणामप्येकशेषो वक्तव्य इत्यर्थः । वक्रदण्डश्चेति । अत्र शब्दवैरूप्येऽप्यर्थैक्यादन्यतरः शिष्यत इति भावः ।

translator notes

commentary BM: with dvau dvau doubled, by karmadhārayavattva [SK 2146] the sup affixes undergo luk and a sup comes again after the whole; the i of the first member is replaced by am (a final substitute ending in m), and a is the final substitute of the second member; the a is not the tyadādi a, which does not apply since the word is a name (saṃjñā). The 'ca' after 'napuṃsakatvam' takes in what is unstated: the whole is neuter and has no dual ending. Followed for 'am for [the final of] the first member, a for [the final of] the second member'.
commentary TB, printed under sk.2147.t1: 'pūrvapadasya' means of the i that is part of the first member, dvau dvau having been reached and luk of sup done by karmadhārayavad-bhāva; 'atvam uttarapadasya' is for the i that is part of the second member; the 'ca' after 'napuṃsakatvam' adds singular treatment (ekavadbhāva), so that 'ato 'm' gives dvandvam; 'rahasyaṃ dvandvaśabdavācyam' because in a secret settled between two [the word] is yogarūḍha. Recorded; consistent with the English.
commentary TB: dvandvaṃ mantrayate means 'two and two, they take counsel', for so it is secret. In ācaturam, the avyayībhāva is by 'āṅ maryādābhividhyoḥ' and ṭac by 'avyayībhāve śaratprabhṛtibhyaḥ'; catur here stands for 'fourth' (caturṇāṃ pūraṇa), i.e. 'up to the fourth'. Yajñapātras are the vessels such as sphya and kapālas; 'prayunakti' means 'sets them out'. In the abhivyakti example the doubling is in its own sense (svārtha). Followed for 'up to the fourth [generation]' and '[the fourth]'. TB's 'two and two' explains why dvandvam can denote a secret; the English keeps the kaumudī's own gloss 'in secret', since the kaumudī makes the secret what dvandva denotes (vācya). Recorded.
commentary BM: in ācaturam the āṅ is inclusive (abhividhi), the avyayībhāva is by 'āṅ maryādā…' and ṭac by the śaratprabhṛti list, so the sense is 'up to and including the fourth'; mithuna means maithuna, and mithunīyanti is kyac by 'supa ātmanaḥ kyac' ('they desire it'), the reading 'mithunāyante' with kyaṅ being a slip; 'mithunaṃ gacchati' = 'attains pairing'; maryādīkṛtya = 'extending over four, starting from oneself'. abhivyakti is being known in the world through constant association (from the Bhāṣya). In 'dvandvaṃ nyañci' the doubling is for vīpsā, elsewhere in its own sense. Followed for 'desire to mate' and 'constant association'.
commentary BM on 'anyatrāpi': as in 'dvandvāni sahate', where heat and cold are one pair, pleasure and pain another, hunger and thirst another; the word is in its own sense and the am etc. are as before; BM adds that 'elsewhere too' is also established by the nipātana in 'cārthe dvandvaḥ'. Recorded.
commentary TB on 'anyatrāpi': 'dvandvaṃ yuddhaṃ pravartate' has doubling for vīpsā ('a fight of two and two'); 'dvandvāni sahate' has doubling in its own sense with singular treatment as before, the plural being due to ekaśeṣa. Recorded.
textual Ours reads 'dvandvaṃ yajñapātrāṇi payunakti'; NSP p. 340 (scan) reads 'prayunakti', as the p43 scan collation (batch19, class A) confirms (Wikisource too). The English renders prayunakti.
textual Ours reads 'pautreṇa prapautreṇāpi maryādīkṛtya'; NSP p. 340 (scan) reads 'pautreṇa prapautreṇāpīty arthaḥ' (batch19, class V; Wikisource agrees with ours). BM comments on 'maryādīkṛtya', so its text had our reading. Ours is translated. Ours also reads 'ambhāvo 'tvaṃ cottarapadasya' where NSP has no 'ca' after 'atvam'; no difference to the English.
textual NSP p. 340 (scan) closes the section after 'dvandvam iṣyate' with 'iti dviruktaprakriyā' and then the half-colophon 'iti śrībhaṭṭojidīkṣitaviracitāyāṃ siddhāntakaumudyāṃ pūrvārdhaṃ samāptam'; our digital kaumudī lacks both (batch19, class M; the same is so for the p42 closing line under SK 2138). They are supplied in the English in a square bracket headed '1915 print:', to distinguish restored mūla from the translator's supplements. The NSP heading of the section (p. 336) is 'dviruktaprakriyā 40'.
textual NSP footnote 2, p. 340 (scan), on 'mithunīyanti': by the word mithuna its act, maithuna, [is meant]; 'desiring that' — the rest of the footnote is partly illegible in the scan. It is not in our editorial_notes.

← all prakaraṇas outline →