Grammatical Riddles from Jain Works

Author(s): Nalini Balbir
Publisher: Z_Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_1_002105.pdf and Nirgranth_Aetihasik_Lekh_Samucchay_Part_2

Page 20

288
Nalini Balbir
Jambū-jyoti
Which (root) has a guna and a vrddhi which are both vowels and consonants ? - The root r (uh, gen. of this root).
The reason is that the guna of this root is ar (vowel + consonant) and its yrddhi is ar (idem), as the commentary explains : ar-är-laksana-gunavrddhi ac-halau svara-vyañjana-rūpe kasya dhātoh syātām ? uh r-kārasya rddhi r-to dur. ur ādese dity-antya-hrasvādeh r-lope un iti rupa-siddhih.
The following instance is fairly sophisticated : * "nirdambheti yad arthatah pranigaded rūpam vi-purvāc ca tat
mināteh kam apeksya jāyata ?", iti ktvä-pratyayah prcchati (bhavadyavādeśam; JP 98)
The affix ktvā asks: "What needs to be taken in consideration in order that the root 'to hurt', preceded by vi, takes the meaning ‘not deceitful' ? Having the substitute yap instead of you : bhavad-yab-ādeśam 23.
As a matter of fact, when the root mi, mināti is used as a simplex, it will form its absolutive with the suffix - tvā (ktva in Pāṇini's language), but when it is preceded by the prefix vi, its correct absolutive will be vi-maya (see Pān. 6.1.50 for the substitution of a in this situation) and will thus use the suffix -ya (krt-affix) which Panini calls lyap (cf.7.1.37 samāse 'nañ-pūrve ktvo lyap), and which Jinavallabha calls yap (> yab through sandhi)24 In doing this, he here follows the metalanguage of Hemacandra's grammar where the counterpart of Pānini's sūtra reads : a-nañah ktvo yap (3.2.154).
9. A variety of riddle where the answer should consist in a grammatical technical term is recorded in the specialized treatises (AC and VMM) and is named śābdiya-jāti. Here again, Ajitasena's AC follows Dharmadāsa's VMM and, like his predecessor, he considers the definition of this variety along with the definition of three other varieties involving knowledge of specific fields, namely tarkya-jäti "philosophical" (see above $ 1.3 end), sautra-jāti (below (V) and sāstraja-jäti "scientific" (AC 2.58 and VMM 2.56). But these types were probably considered obvious, or best understood through concrete examples, since there is hardly any definition (iñeyam.../ śābdīyam śabda-samjñabhih...., VMM 2.56;...sabdād udbhavam ... sābdam ..., AC 2.58).
The illustrative verse of the AC as it is edited reads as follows:
na slāgh[y]ate munih kasmai? sub-antam kim nigadyatām ?