Amrita Collected Papers by A M Ghatage

SR No.: 006968
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Jitendra B Shah
Publisher: Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi Ahmedabad
Total Pages: 530
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 10 MB

Page 284

275
Systematics of Panini's Aṣṭādhyāyī
do and go a step further and regard the first two compounds as also separate words. Both write तत्र कुरुगार्हपत रिक्तगुरु इत्येतौ अविभक्तिकौ इतरे तु असूतजरतीत्येवमादयः प्रथमैकवचनान्ताः । सा च प्रथमा सुब्व्यत्ययेन षष्ठ्याः स्थाने वेदितव्या । All this is done to avoid the use of af at the end and the interpretation of the Gen. pl. as indicative of a . At this stage only the last word is in the Gen. pl. and hence an addition of is essential to make it stand for a . A trace of the original position is preserved in the remark of कैयट दासीभाराणामिति बहुवचनं द्वन्द्वसमासत्रयं मत्वा a4 to justify the whole discussion. To justify the presence of case-suffixes in a compound he now adds विभक्त्यलोपस्तु सौत्रत्वान्निर्देशस्य स्यात् ।
Before we conclude that what is represented as a hypothetical argument is really a reversal of historical facts, it is necessary to ascertain the strength of the principle on which it is based. The TP of both the faчf and the g are indicated by three different methods in the viz. by the use of af in Mas. and Neu. gender, of fe in both these genders and the plural of the word with which the TT is supposed to begin. But the statistical distribution of these three is not such as can be attributed to a random choice. While the use of af appears to be the most frequent and later on the only choice, the use of fa and pl. appear to be relics of an older method or usage. According to tradition, the plural of a noun is used to indicate a in the following six sūtras ii.1.40; ii.2.38; .4.31; ii.4.61; v.4.139 and vi.2.42. It is now necessary to ascertain the significance of the choice of this method in these limited number of Sūtras. There is no af or भाष्य on ii. 4.61 न तौल्वलिभ्यः and v. 4.139 कुम्भपदीषु च But in all the other four cases, there appears to have been a pre- suggestion that these should be read as शौण्डादिभि:, कडारादयः, अर्धर्चादय: and दासीभारादीनाम् probably made by the af on the basis of either greater clarity, conformity with the current usage or refusal to admit the pl. as indicative of a T. In all these cases पतञ्चलि sticks to the principle बहुवचननिर्देशात्.... विज्ञास्यते । If अर्धर्चादयः and बहुवचननिर्देशात् सिद्धम् are real वार्त्तिक on P.ii. 4. 31, all others can also be taken as वार्तिक' and the non-acceptance of the principle of बहुवचननिर्देश can be considered as older than कात्यायन. All the other वार्त्तिक of कात्यायन make use of आदि to indicate a गण and only once is प्रभृति used for this purpose but never a plural of a word.
A closer examination of the few in which the plural appears to indicate a may help us to determine its exact significance. As stated by Pat., occurs in P.ii 1.40 and the plural is made to include other forms like अक्षधूर्त, अक्षकितव etc. and कैयट refers to a view that only synonyms are to be included (f). His next suggestion that the plural may be