Sambodhi 1984 Vol 13 and 14

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

Page 57

Nilanjana S. Shah
In support of his comment on #: cafea Fil......1 2 (2.3.16), he cites the following verses of Bhatti : 219019 75Taf: falsa cafea a 997 (8.98), and 724R axt: quad galera (14.18) 1.
With reference to tliis sütra, Sarañadeva discusses, when the word 14: would govern the dative case and wlien it would govern the accusative case.
He makes it clears that when there is 1401 86974, between 24: and कति, it would get गति संज्ञा by साक्षात्प्रभुतीनि च (1.4.74) and hence would govern the accusative case, but when as is pervaded by Graffet, then 77: would govern the dative, as fast cannot accrue to it in the absence of alcula#6794. He makes it clear that in the verses quoted above, नमः governs the dative case in the absence of द्योत्यद्योतक सम्बन्ध.
The remarks of Sarañadeva, on this point bear much resemblance to those of Siradeva in connection with this topic.4
Saranadeva draws attention to the fact, that the forn 167 1791: used by Bhatti in the verse, "AI FA TETTie parent gea afa: (5.58) itself makes clear his opinion about the inclusion of in the sūtra.
Some grammarians opine that in the sutra, ufaf4i91174 feg: azeitag (1.4.77), the root is included in the sūtra and it is indicated by **:' the ablative singular form of (1991 faa Tarot seguinfo feel muffergu*: faqat 69978 1 Those who believe that this sūtra applics to the root it also, will give the Parasmaipadı forms such as A1 #: E etc., in which there is elision of the affix fot : laer (3.1.44). From the form ar a: given by Bhatti, it becomes obvious that he disagrees with those who include it in the sūtra.
The compound Railgai (10.2) employed by Bhatti is prone to the criticism, according to the sūtra Alagic 7 (3.2.188). The above compound fer: is formed by adding #3 to VAT meaning respect.
The problem is that this sūtra enjoins the affix pa after these roots with the force of the present and Bhatti has employed it with the force of the past. Now if the affix 73 enjoined here in the force of the present may bar v a (3.2.102), then Bhatti's usage will not fit in the context.
Saranadeva argues that by this sūra, only the ta which was 8151a in the present tense is enjoined here. That * which is enjoined in the