Candragomins Syntactic Rules Some Misconceptions

Author(s): Mahadev Deshpande
Publisher: Mahadev Deshpande

Page 12

CANDRAGOMIN'S SYNTACTIC RULES
145
(abhihita, ukta). This would allow the use of the nominative case ending for the Word samartha. [B] One may take recourse to the notion of vipratişedha as defined by C.1.1.16. Since gantum does not express agent, we obtain the instrumental case by C.2.1.62 (kartari trtiyā). However, the affix-ti in bhavati denotes agent, and hence we obtain the nominative case by C.2.1.93 (artha-mā tre prathama). Since C.2.1.93 is the later (para) rule, it prevails, and this would allow the nominative case for the word samartha.
Easier and attractive as these alternatives may seem, they create problems, or rather do not solve problems in many other complex sentences. For instance, both of these alternatives fail to explain the syntax of the word devadattam in a sentence such as: devadattar gacchantam paşyati yajñadattah, while the principle suggested by me above explains its accusative case. It will be unfair to Candragomin to ascribe to him an assumption which causes more problems, particularly when he explicitly says
that the assumption of the form bhavati solves problems in samartho gantum. 7. Väkyäpadiya, II. 479-483; George Cardona (1978). . 8. Historically speaking, P.1.4.2. extends only up to P.2.3.38 (kadārāh karmadhāraye).
For a historical discussion, see: George Cardona, "Some Principles of Papioi's Grammar", Journal of Indian Philosophy, Vol. I, 1970, pp. 40-74. Mahābhāşya on P.1.4.2., Vol. I., Pt. II., pp. 204ff. Once P. 1.4.2. is extended to cover the whole of the grammar, occasionally the previous rule needs to apply in preference to a later rule. To get over this problem, Patañjali proposes to interpret the word para in this rule to mean işta "desirable". Thus the rule is, occasionally, interpreted to mean: Of two conflicting rules, the desired rule supersedes the other. Mahābhā $ya, Vol. I., pt. I., p. 123, and pt. II., p. 207. Candragomin also accepts this interpretation
of the word para. See the Vrtti on C.1.1.16, Vol. I, p. 13. 10. Vrtti on C.1.1.16, Vol. I., p.13. There are indeed a number of paribhā $ās "maxims"
in Candragomin's system dealing with various conflict-procedures. See: CandraVyakarana, Vol. II, pp. 396-398, and Paribhāşā sarngraha, ed. by K. V. Abhyankar,
Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1968, pp. 47-48. 11. Vrtti on C.2.1.44., Vol. I., p. 169. 12. For these examples and various interpretations, see: Mahabhd sya, Vol. I, pt.
II., p. 492. 13. Vrtti on C.2.1.51., Vol. I., p. 172. 14. Vrtti on C.1.3.150., Vol. I, p. 130. 15. Mahabh8şya, Vol. I., pt. II, pp. 241 and 249.
[Received 26 February 1979]