Example for the Day 07/18/2010
Karthik Vaidhinathan
Today we will look at the derivation of the द्वितीया विभक्ति बहुवचनम् form of the noun आचार्य (भगवद्गीता 1.26)
1. आचार्य (gets the प्रातिपदिक संज्ञा by कृत्तद्धितसमासाश्च। 1.2.46, since it is a कृदन्त form)
2. आचार्य शस् (The सुँप् affixes are ordained by the sutram स्वौजसमौट्छस्टाभ्याम्भिस्ङेभ्याम्भ्यस्ङसिँभ्याम्भ्यस्ङसोसाम्ङ्योस्सुप्। 4.1.2, since आचार्य has a प्रातिपदिक संज्ञा. These 21 प्रत्ययs are grouped into 7 groups of 3 pratyayas and in each group, the three प्रत्ययs gets the संज्ञाs एकवचनम्, द्विवचनम्, बहुवचनम् respectively by the sutram सुपः। 1.4.103. Since our विवक्षा is to derive a द्वितीया विभक्ति बहुवचनम् form, the appropriate प्रत्यय is शस्)
3. आचार्य अस् (शकार is an इत् letter by लशक्वतद्धिते। 1.3.8 and is removed by the sutram तस्य लोपः। 1.3.9 Also, शस् gets the विभक्ति संज्ञा by the sutram विभक्तिश्च। 1.4.104 and this prevents the ending सकार to not get the इत् संज्ञा because of न विभक्तौ तुस्माः। 1.3.4, even though the rule हलन्त्यम्। 1.3.3 would have made it a candidate to get the इत् संज्ञा)
4. आचार्यास् (We have three rules that can come into operation here. First is अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः। 6.1.101 But the rule अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 stops its operation. The operation of अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 is further stopped by the rule प्रथमयोः पूर्वसवर्णः। 6.1.102, which gives the पूर्वसवर्ण दीर्घ as an एकादेश for both the अकारs)
5. आचार्यान् (By the rule तस्माच्छसो नः पुंसि। 6.1.103, the शस् प्रत्यय ordained after a masculine प्रातिपदिक, following a पूर्वसवर्णदीर्घ that was ordained in the previous rule, gets a नकार आदेश. By अलोऽन्त्यस्य। 1.1.52, it replaces the ending सकार)
6. आचार्यान् (By the rule अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि। 8.4.2, the नकार gets a णकार आदेश, since it is preceded by रेफ in the same पद and the only letters between them are यकार and आकार, which are both members of the अट् प्रत्याहार. However, since the नकार is पदान्त, this णकार आदेश is stopped by the rule पदान्तस्य। 8.4.37)
Thus we get the final form आचार्यान्.
The operation of this rule can be seen in several masculine forms, not necessarily अदन्तs. For instance, look at the following भगवद्गीता lines (1.26, 1.27)
तत्रापश्यत्स्थितान्पार्थः पितॄनथ पितामहान्।
आचार्यान्मातुलान्भ्रातॄन्पुत्रान्पौत्रान्सखींस्तथा॥
In these lines, all the words पितॄन्, पितामहान्, आचार्यान्, मातुलान्, भ्रातॄन्, पुत्रान्, पौत्रान्, सखीन्, श्वशुरान् have the same kind of form. Here we have examples of अकारान्त and ऋकारान्त प्रातिपदिकs.
Question for the day:
1. What are the kinds of situations when you would expect this नकारादेश (by तस्माच्छसो नः पंसि। 6.1.103) to not happen?
2. What are the conditions necessary for नकार to get a णकारादेश?
Regards
Karthik
Satish Karandikar
I would like to start a discussion with Karthik about the question of विप्रतिषेध: (this is the term used by पाणिनि: to refer to a situation where two or more rules in the सपाद-सप्ताध्यायी come for simultaneous application and a decision has to be made as to how to break the tie.) With regard to the त्रिपादी section there is no question of विप्रतिषेध: (conflict) because by पूवत्रासिद्धम् 8.2.1 the entire त्रिपादी has to wait until the operations in the सपादसप्ताध्यायी are done and then within the त्रिपादी rules are applied sequentially.
I am hesitant to get into this because I don't want people to be scared away by the level of detail. At the same time, this is a great opportunity for us to practice the विप्रतिषेध: drill which will be needed frequently as we go forward. I would like this to be in the archives for future students who may be interested.
For those who don't want to go deeper at the point, just accept the fact that in Karthik's example अतो गुणे 6.1.97 over-rules अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 but does not over-rule प्रथमयो: पूर्वसवर्ण: 6.1.102. If at a later time, you would like to know the reasons behind this you can come back and refer to this thread.
Okay - Karthik - first question: Did अतो गुणे 6.1.97 over-rule अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 because the former is an अपवाद: of the latter?
Ramakrishna - your question about why the अनुस्वार-सम्बन्धि-नियमा: are in the त्रिपादी section - is pending. We'll take it up after the current thread is complete. Don't want to post too much on one day.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AVG-wknd-sanskrit-class" group.
To post to this group, send email to avg-wknd-sa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to avg-wknd-sanskrit...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/avg-wknd-sanskrit-class?hl=en.
Rama Surya
Satishacharya:
I would like to discuss about the use of विप्रतिषेध: param karyam panini rule. This panini rule applies to only certain sections of Astadhyayi not for entair 8 sections of Astadhyayi (example samasa section) inaccodance with D. George cardona. There is kashika statement “विप्रतिषेध: poorvam karyam” under some panini rule vartika of kashika. If this is true which rule is that? Please explain विप्रतिषेध: param karyam rule compleatly with its limitations and applications.
I have few requests (if possible).
1. After discussion, clarification, correction etc, of “sandhi Examples”, please document final version of them in your Kalpesh Link or Satishji Link similar to “Panini Sutram” document to use later by your students from one document instead of many e-mails.
2. There are several Panini sutra documents. Older versions could be deleted since they are not required and cause confusion. It is easy to maintain one final document.
3. If possible consolidate to one stop link (combine Kalpesh link, Satishji link and AVG week end link).
Thanks for all hard work of the team.
Chatraha
Rama Surya
From: karandik...@yahoo.com
To: avg-wknd-sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: AvgWkndSanskrit: Example for the Day 07/18/2010 - Advanced discussion
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:48:14 -0400
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Learn more.
Karthik Vaidhinathan
No. अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 is not an अपवादः for अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः। 6.1.101. The former applies to the case when ह्रस्वः अकारः is followed by अ, ए, ओ while the latter is applicable when अक् is followed by a सवर्णम् अक्. Thus, the preceding condition of 6.1.97 is a subset of 6.1.101, but what is following is not a subset. Therefore it is not an अपवादः.
Regards
Karthik
Satish Karandikar
Dear Rama Surya:
Thank you for your suggestions.
I have removed older versions of the List of Sutras document.
We will be having a discussion about the rule विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् 1.4.2 shortly. It is going to be step 4 in the "Advanced Discussion" thread currently running with Karthik.
With regard to your other requests, I have forwarded them to Kalpeshji who is managing the links and other technical aspects.
Kalpesh Jasapara
Thank you for all your suggestions.
I understand about the confusion the various one-page-links is causing and the repetition of the information in them. I am traveling this month, but sometime in next month will work on consolidating all the information about various classes, their google groups and also various links and recordings together at one place.
At the same time we will also see if it is worthwhile to re-archive these emails too.
with regards,
-Kalpesh
Kalpesh Jasapara
Kashika in 6-1-97 अतो गुणे | says it is an अपवादः |
<snip> अकः सवर्णे दीर्घस्य अपवादः। <snip>
Also based on fact 6-1-97 being an अपवादः for 6-1-101, it cannot be an 'अपवादः' for 6-1-102. There is paribhasha mentioned in Kashika for 6-1-102 to this effect, <snip> अतो गुणे इति यदकारे पररूपं ततकः सवर्णे दीर्घत्वम् एव बाधते, न तु पूर्वसवर्णदीर्घत्वम्, पुरस्तादपवाद अनन्तरान् विधीन् बाधन्ते न उत्तरातिति । <snip>.
What do you think?
with regards,
-Kalpesh
Rama Surya
Satishacharya/ Kalpeshacharya:
Thank you very much for your consideration.
rama Surya
From: karandik...@yahoo.com
To: avg-wknd-sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: AvgWkndSanskrit: Example for the Day 07/18/2010 - Advanced discussion
Satish Karandikar
Thanks, Kalpesh - what the काशिका has given is, of course, correct. My idea of having this "discussion" with Karthik was to do our own analysis and build up to understand the statement in the काशिका.
The काशिका has already digested all the logic and given the final verdict. That will be the final step for us. So far we've only finished step one - which is that अतो गुणे 6.1.97 is not a clear cut अपवाद: for अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 as Karthik has correctly shown.
Satish Karandikar
Okay, Karthik. Let us go to the next step which is अन्तरङ्गम् versus बहिरङ्गम् Could you explain briefly what this means and see if it may help us in our example of breaking the tie between अतो गुणे 6.1.97 and अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101
Karthik Vaidhinathan
When two operations are such that one is internal from the viewpoint of another, then the internal rule is अन्तरङ्गम् and the external rule is बहिरङ्गम्. Like for instance, if we take an example like the sandhi शतशस् + अथ (भगवद्गगीता 11.5), the सकार first gets the रुँ आदेशः (ससजुषो रुः। 8.2.66) and then the उ आदेशः (अतो रोरप्लुतादप्लुते। 6.1.113) and we get, शतस उ + अथ. Here we have two possible operations that can be performed. One is between अकार of शतस and उकार and the other is between the उकार and the अकार of अथ. The former is अन्तरङ्गम् and the latter is बहिरङ्गम् because the former is within a पदम् while the latter is between two पदम्s.
When we have an अन्तरङ्गम् rule and a बहिरङ्गम् rule coming for operation simultaneously, the अन्तरङ्गम् rule gets the first precedence.
In our case, both the rules अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 and अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः। 6.1.101 are coming for operation at the same place, between the अङ्गम् and the प्रत्ययः. Therefore, the अन्तरङ्गम् बहिरङ्गम् distinction is not applicable in this case.
Regards
Karthik
Kalpesh Jasapara
I understand your purpose now, will sit back and enjoy. Thank you for taking this topic up as this had been one of the most confusing ones.
With today's Karthikji's reply I can see where and how your are leading the discussion.
with regards,
-Kalpesh
Satish Karandikar
Yes, that is correct Karthik. अन्तरङ्गम् versus बहिरङ्गम् will not help to resolve our issue, because whether we apply अतो गुणे 6.1.97 or अकः सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101, the operation is taking place between the same two elements (the ending अ of राम and the beginning अ of the प्रत्यय: अस्) So no argument can be made that one rule is more internal or external compared to the other.
Please note that there are situations in which deciding what is अन्तरङ्गम् (internal) and what is बहिरङ्गम् (external) is not easy. Karthik has given a good synopsis of the idea. For more details please see Prof. Abhyankar's "Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar" under "अन्तरङ्ग" For now the important thing is that it clearly does not resolve our present conflict.
Okay - let us try the next step which is नित्य-कार्यम् versus अनित्य-कार्यम्. Karthik - could you tell us what this means and whether it will help us break the tie?
Karthik Vaidhinathan
When two rules are going to apply in the same situation, say rule 1 and rule 2, if application of rule 1 causes the nimittam that brought rule 2 into application to be lost, then rule 2 is अनित्य-कार्यम्. If the nimittam exists even after application of rule 1, and so rule 2 can still apply, then rule 2 is नित्य-कार्यम्. In such situations, if one rule is नित्य-कार्यम् and the other rule is अनित्य-कार्यम्, the नित्य-कार्यम् gets the precedence.
In our case, if we apply अतो गुणे। 6.1.97, we get an एकादेशः in the place of both the vowels, and that makes अकः सवर्णे दीर्घ। 6.1.101 inapplicable. Similarly, if we apply अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः। 6.1.101, अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 becomes inapplicable. Thus they are both mutually अनित्यम्. So, we cannot apply the नित्यम्-अनित्यम् principle in this case.
Regards
Karthik
Satish Karandikar
That is correct.
If we apply अतो गुणे 6.1.97 we will get a single substitute अ in place of अ + अ and that would make अकः सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 in-applicable. Similarly if we apply अकः सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 first then we get a single substitute आ in place of अ + अ, after which अतो गुणे 6.1.97 cannot apply.
So each of these two rules is dependent on whether or not the other has applied. So neither is a नित्य-कार्यम् (independent operation.)
Please note that even though this step did not help us here, it will resolve the issue in many other situations. So this concept of नित्य-कार्यम् should be understood well.
Okay, let's go to the next stage which is to follow the rule विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् 1.4.2. Now, why didn't we go to this सूत्रम् right away before trying the first three steps? The reason for this is that विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् 1.4.2 only applies for those cases where there is तुल्य-बल-विरोध: - which means that none of the rules involved in the conflict are able to claim an upper hand using the first three steps.
काशिकायाम् १.४.२तमे सूत्रे एवम् व्याख्यातम् -
उत्सर्गापवाद-नित्यानित्य-अन्तरङ्गबहिरङ्गेषु तुल्यबलता न अस्ति इति न अयम् अस्य योगस्य (सूत्रस्य) विषय: ।
Karthik - could you tell us what would be the result if we apply विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम् 1.4.2 to our situation?
Karthik Vaidhinathan
If we apply विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम्। 1.4.2, अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः। 6.1.101 would apply because it is the परकार्यम् (अतो गुणे। 6.1.97), whenever two अकारः are in संहिता, both in पदान्तम् and अपदान्तम् situations. अतो गुणे। 6.1.97 will only apply when other गुणः (ए, ओ) follow अकारः.
Regards
Karthik
Satish Karandikar
Yes, that is correct - if we look at the परकार्यम् then अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 will be preferred over अतो गुणे 6.1.97 because it is a later rule in the अष्टाध्यायी.
So, to recapitulate - we went thru four steps:
1. उत्सर्ग: (general rule) vs. अपवाद: (exception - which means that it applies in a sub-domain of the उत्सर्ग:) The अपवाद: has to be given a chance in its sub-domain otherwise it will never apply. In our case, neither rule - as it stands - is an अपवाद: of the other.
2. अन्तरङ्गम् (internal operation) vs. बहिरङ्गम् (external operation). The internal operation is given priority. In our case, this criteria did not come into the picture because both rules were acting in the same location - so neither was more internal than the other.
3. नित्यकार्यम् (independent rule) vs. अनित्यकार्यम् (dependent rule). The नित्य-कार्यम् is given preference. In our case this did not help either because when either one of the rules applies then the other cannot apply. So neither one is नित्यकार्यम्.
4. Finally, we have to take the rule which occurs later (परकार्यम्) in the अष्टाध्यायी. In our case, if we go by this we will not get the correct form.
At this stage, we should check to see if there is a वार्त्तिकम् by कात्यायन: which would allow use to apply the पूर्वकार्यम् rather than the परकार्यम् In our case, there is no वार्त्तिकम् as such.
Okay, then we should check the व्याख्यानम् (काशिका, सिद्धान्तकौमुदी and commentaries on them) to see if they can help us out. The पदमञ्जरी-टीका (on the काशिका) gives a good explanation. It goes as follows: As per the rule अदेङ् गुण: 1.1.2, the term गुण: refers to the three letters - अकार:, एकार: and ओकार: That is गुण: = अत् + एङ् If पाणिनि: did not want the rule अतो गुणे 6.1.97 to apply in the case when अत् follows, then he could have said एङि instead of गुणे. (It is important to note here that there is no अनुवृत्ति: of गुणे going down into later rules. So it cannot be claimed that गुणे is used because it is required in the rules that follow 6.1.97.) Thus पाणिनि: must have intended अतो गुणे 6.1.97 to apply in the case where there is a (अपदान्त:) अकार: followed by an अकार: - which is अत: अति. Now we can understand why the काशिका says that अतो गुणे 6.1.97 is an अपवाद: for अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101, because after applying the above logic it is clear to see that अत: अति is a subset of अक: सवर्णे (अकि)
Karthik - the next question is - can this same reasoning be used again to try to make अतो गुणे 6.1.97 an अपवाद: for प्रथमयो: पूर्वसवर्ण: 6.1.102 also?
Karthik Vaidhinathan
We cannot apply the same reasoning in this case because we have an अपवादः that occurs before the उत्सर्गः. When such is the case, it stops only the first such candidate rule, but cannot stop a rule after that, because काशिका says पुरस्तादपवादा अनन्तरान् विधीन् बाधन्ते न उत्तरान्। So, because of this प्रथमयोः पूर्वसवर्णः। 6.1.102 is not stopped by अतो गुणे। 6.1.97.
Regards
Karthik
Satish Karandikar
Yes, that is correct - अतो गुणे 6.1.97 cannot over-rule प्रथमयो: पूर्वसवर्ण: 6.1.102 because it has already justified its wording by over-ruling अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101.
The logic is as follows:
As previously discussed, अतो गुणे 6.1.97 is considered an अपवाद: for अक: सवर्णे दीर्घ: 6.1.101 (in the case where a अपदान्त-अकार: is followed by an अकार:) by the fact that पाणिनि: used the term गुणे instead of एङि The whole idea of an अपवाद: (exception) over-ruling an उत्सर्ग: (general rule) is based on वचन-प्रामाण्यम् - which means that something which पाणिनि: said would become useless. That is why an अपवाद: has to be given a chance. And the only way it can be given a chance is by allowing it to supersede the general rule in the case where both may be applied.
In our case, the वचन-प्रामाण्यम् rested on the use of the term गुणे (= अति + एङि) in 6.1.97. Once 6.1.97 is allowed to over-rule 6.1.101 then गुण-ग्रहणम् has what is called चारितार्थ्यम् - it has proved its existence.
Now when we look at the choice between 6.1.97 and 6.1.102, then we can no longer invoke वचन-प्रामाण्यम् Nothing that पाणिनि: has said becomes useless if 6.1.97 doesn't over-rule 6.1.102. So then after considering अन्तरङ्गम् vs. बहिरङ्गम् and नत्यम् vs. अनित्यम् - both of which don't help in our case - we finally decide that 6.1.102 should prevail over 6.1.97 because it is a later rule (परकार्यम्) in the अष्टाध्यायी.
All this is summarized in the परिभाषा - पुरस्ताद् अपवादा: अनन्तरान् विधीन् बाधन्ते न उत्तरान्। Exceptions that precede (the rules which teach operations that have to be superseded by the exceptions) supersede only those rules that stand nearest to them and not the subsequent rules.