________________
194
ASHOK AKLUJKAR
apoddhāra-padārthā ye, ye cârthāḥ sthita-lakşaņāḥ / anvākhyeyāś ca ye sabdā, ye cāpi pratipädakāḥ || 24 || kārya-kārana-bhāvena yogya-bhāvena ca sthitāḥ ! dharme ye pratyaye cāngam sambandhāḥ sādhvasādhuşu || 25 || te lingais ca sva-sabdais ca śāstre 'sminn upavarnitāḥ / smrtyartham anugamyante kecid eva yathāgamam // 26 //
After this enumeration, one would naturally expect verse 27 to begin a discussion of the first topic, namely the apoddhāra-padārtha. Instead, one finds it initiating the discussion of the seventh topic which is the dharma-sambandha and adharma-sambandha respectively of the sādhu and asādhu linguistic forms. The only satisfactory reason for skipping over the first six topics in the kārikās is that those, and only those, are mainly covered in the V of verses 1.24—26. The seventh topic alone remains to be explained 28 and the twenty-seventh verse takes it up for discussion.
3.7 The next piece of evidence indicates even more strongly that the kārikās anticipate the V. It is as follows:
vitarkitaḥ purā buddhyā kvacid arthe nivesitaḥ / karamebhyo vivrttena dhvaninā so 'nugrhyate || 1:47 || ... avikriya-dharmakam hi sabda-tattvam dhvanim vikriya-dharmaņam anu vikriyate. tac ca sūksme vyāpini dhvanau karana-vyāpāreņa praciyamāne, sthülenābhra-samghātavad upalabhyena nādātmanā prāpta-vivarte 29 tad-vivartānukāreņātyantam avivartamānam vivartamānam iva gļhyate.
28 That there is cognition of meaning because sabda and artha are related is such a basic, common sense fact (Vrsabha, p. 81.18-19) that Bhartshari has not been forced to devote much space to discuss it. Also, the discussions of the three remaining relations are indirectly a discussion of the pratyayānga relation.
29 The editions read präpta-vivartena. But then the sentence seems to be syntactically anomalous; the relation of the locative absolute construction sūkşme ... praciyamāne to the succeeding portion of the sentence is not clear; further, there is ambiguity as to what the component tad. in the compound tad-vivartānukārena refers to-to dhvani or to nādātman. Most probably it refers to dhvani, for the segment nādātmanā prāpta-vivartena tad-vivartānukārena with tad- referring to nādātman would be a very awkward way of saying what could be said simply with nādātma-vivartānukāreņa. Moreover, in the very preceding sentence, BhartȚhari says ... dhvanim vikriyā-dharmāņam anu vikriyate. It is almost certain then that tad- refers to dhvani. This point aids us further in guessing what the original text of the V could have been. The vivarta mentioned in the compound prāptavivarta must then be the vivarta of dhvani and the compound as a whole must qualify dhvani; that is, its form must have been prāpta-vivarte which