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 324

Pāṇini 1. 4. 32
315
word ofon, the second 41. To put these two together, we can visualise a couple of possibilities. One is (1) to consider the aferch to add one more definition of HIGH, fruita afufa # HIGH4, as phrased by the church. The other (II) is to add the word क्रियया to the first making it कर्मणा क्रिययापि यमभिप्रैति # HYGF74. In this case the two conditions can be taken either in a (a) conjunctive or (b) disjunctive sense. The results of these alternative ways of taking the rules differ and may give us a clue to deciding how the Vārttikakāra intended them to be taken. To take the alternative Ila is clearly inadmissible because it does not improve the position of the sūtra 1.4.32. by including the intransitive verbs and the addition becomes redundant. In the second case IIb the position becomes the same as I, with the two rules contracted into one. In both cases the use of her to the exclusion of 440 leads to the undesirable result which happens when the word ou is simply dropped from the sūtra. This is due to the fact that there is implied in the context of 3fafa and becomes prominent when Anfo is dropped. As ka puts it : यदि तहि क्रिययाभिप्रेयमाणस्यापि भवति कटं करोतीत्यादावपि प्राप्नोति वचनाद्धि कर्मसंप्रदानसंज्ञयोः
fa: PG. The addition of the words : tarifah for afe! GUTAS Freafare does not solve the problem, but certainly offers a hint to that effect.
The only way out of the difficulty is to consider the rules as being strictly ordered. We may call these rules for and fh4f1919 rules. We may then arrange them in this order and apply them one after another. After the 064ff 1914 rule has been applied, which will deal with transitive verbs, we apply the
479 rule which will be then applicable to intransitive or reflexive verbs and such other verbs which have no object expressed or implied. In such a case the distinction between I and IIa becomes operationally of no value. After we have applied the rule of fufftype we may apply the rule which lays down both the conditions in a conjunctive sense. But the result will be the same; because, as a consequence of the strict ordering of the rules, the first condition becomes vacuous and only the second condition remains operative, now being applicable to the verbs left over after the effect of the first rule i.e. intransitive and reflexive verbs or verbs without a direct object. Thus a strict ordering of the rules alone will satisfy the needs of the case and we may be justified in thinking that the Vārttikakāra intended such an ordering of his rule vis-a-vis the sūtra of Pānini 1. 4. 32. He probably intended to indicate it with the use of the word 319. In this sense, the form of the Värttika fMETHY onder is to be preferred to the shorter one क्रियाग्रहणम्.
Pānini 1. 4. 32
Indian Linguistics 1968
14