Sambodhi 1984 Vol 13 and 14

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, Ramesh S Betai, Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 52

Bhatti as quoted in the Durghatayytti
Some odd usages of Bhatti are justified by Saraṇadeva on the basis of the Ganapatha of Pāṇini.
In the following usages, Rafha Ay 191fo: (1.17) and 29:21 शान्त्युदकुम्भहस्ता (2.20), the words पाणि and हस्त should be placed in the beginning of the compound, according to aahfango agad (2.235).
First, Saranadeva suggests that the words may be categorised in Barlearfia group, since this group is an 31&fànur where all the forms are not specifically enumerated. Then by sgafera H91 laid down in the sutra arrarara (2.2.37), the page of tifo and Fa becomes heat.
Saranadeva adds that the other way to justify these usages is to resort, to the two Vārtikas &7071&25 farsrecaxa of Haa sfa 777777 and fastei: galagra gifapizacifèxi: 9999# (on 2.2.36).
Bharatamallika, while justifying the usage ay Heat, on the basis of the Vartika प्रहरणार्थेभ्यो etc. elucidates it thus : शान्युदकुम्भस्तु अहितनिवारण साधयात उपचारेण प्रहरणम् ।
In the verse of Bhatti, pasu' gana ar Baat EH (5.60), the word सत्यवद्य is formed by the application of the यत् affix after the root वद in the sense of the agent of an action.
But the sūtra at: gf #97# (3.1.106) according to which this word is formed, prescribes a affix to denote 19.
Saraña deva solves the problem in the following way: we first add यत् (य) to वद to denotes भाव, i.e., सत्यस्य वद्यम् = सत्यवद्यः । To this is added as a possessive termination by the sūtra azafar farasa (5:2.127), अादि being an आकृतिगण. Thus we get सत्यवद्यमस्यास्तीति सत्यवद्यः । 'Jayamangala explains it in the same manner.
The word al employed in Bhatti's verse, '#17991: Fagfaa barál: (2.13), seems to go against the sätra foartelerats (3.3.104), because y is not mentioned in the fucifer
Saranadeva, justifies the word l acc. to this sūtra, by including it in f fany, because it is an 37 fazo. As another alternative he suggests that one can apply 3 to 5 on the basis of in the sūtra, fafayfa9f7a62 (3.3.105) and derive 31997:
The vocative singular सौमित्रे in the verse of Bhatti, जातेय कुरु सौमित्रो (5.54) is not correct, because according to the sūtra la (4.1.120), the form should become a fala, meaning the son of Sumitra,