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 297

288
Amrita
.'
Patañjali's use of the maxim is casual and is applied to specific cases. We have to extract from his practice the way in which he would use it in relation to classes of linguistic elements of Sanskrit in order to generalise its nature.
By a close analysis of the Mahābhāsya on the twelve sūtras of Pāṇini discussed above we can summarise the use of this maxim as follows :
The principle is not applied in the following situations : (1) the concept of number expressed by a numeral and by the grammatical category like singular, dual or plural, (2) when two words express a generic and a specific concept of the same nature, (3) to the law of agreement if it exists in a language, (4) if a distinction of meaning cannot be otherwise expressed in a language, (5) when an emphasis is to be placed on one of the two occurrences of the same idea. Here we can also include what can be called as a pregnant use of a word as in the famous line ravikiranānugrhītāni bhavanti kamalani kamalāni, which is often discussed by Sanskrit rhetoricians.
The maxim is allowed to function in the following situations : (1) if the concept is expressed by a case and a derivative suffix, (2) the use of a root when it expresses an action which is considered as having an abstract unity, (3) different suffixes having the same grammatical meaning, (4) two uses of a suffix like san with verbs, (5) two possessive suffixes having the same form and meaning, 6) a case suffix and a word expressing the meaning of that case, (7) absolute synonyms.
Looked at from the point of meanings involved, it may be observed that the maxim is applied to words having lexical meanings with stringent conditions like absolute synonymity or unity of an abstract concept which cannot be split into parts without destroying its unity. If forced to occur together, such words tend to develop some difference of meaning or some overtones. As applied to grammatical meaning, the maxim is generally applicable, and a difference in the shape of such morphemes plays only a secondary part. It is generally observed that the development of a semantic difference in a grammatical category is rare and hard to conceive. When a lexical item comes in contact with a grammatical element, the rule is not generally applicable. It holds good among different types of grammatical categories.
We may conclude by saying that in spite of a difference in the methodology used and many decisions taken on the basis of expediency in polemic arguments, Patañjali's use of this maxim stems from a good grasp of the nature of language in general and of Sanskrit in particular. 22. Uktārthānām Aprayogah, (Dr. R.N. Dandekar Felicitation Vol.)8