As I said before, the advantage in following a rearranged version of Panini’s grammar, such as the Siddhanta-Kaumudi or its Lite version, the Laghu-S-K, is that it takes us rapidly into the bowels of the system, as related sutras which may be far apart in the original, are brought together according to the topic under discussion. There are some differences even between Varadaraja’s Laghu and its mentor, the S-K of Bhattoji Dikshita, which I will explain later; for the present, I will follow the Laghu.
The last two posts covered the first section of the Laghu, that to do with defining terms (saṃjñā), with a number of sutras drawn from the first quarter (pāda) of Panini’s first Book (adhyāya), and a few besides from other pāda-s. Now the second section of the Laghu is captioned Ac-sandhiḩ, or Vowel-joining. However, the corresponding section in the full-length S-K is captioned Paribhāṣā-prakaraṇam. We will follow the Laghu in the first instance here.
This section starts off with
Laghu 21. Iko yaṇaci (Panini 6.1.77)
We have referred to this already in the course of Panini’s first pāda. Two issues are in consideration here: one, the import or meaning of this sutra, and the other, the specific significance of the particular case (vibhakti) endings (sUP forms), i.e. the meta-language used by Panini. We have actually already covered these topics; here’s how the Laghu S-K approaches them (Laghu 21):
ikaḥ (possessive case, of the iK = of the vowels i, u, ṛ, ḷ, and their variants) sthāne (in place) yaṇ (nominative case, the yaṆ semi-vowels = y, v, r, l) syāt (let there be), aci (locative case, in [the presence of] the aC = the vowels) saṃhitāyām viṣaye (in the matter of saṅhitā = contact)
Ballantyne’s rendering: “Instead of a letter denoted by the pratyāhāra iK, let there be one denoted by the pratyāhāra yaṆ, in each instance where one denoted by the pratyāhāra aC immediately follows”.
That is, when one of the vowels included in the set iK is followed by any other vowel in “closest proximity” of contact called saṅhitā (see the previous post # 36, here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2016/06/36-section-i-of-laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi.html), then the first vowel is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ from the set yaṆ.
The example given is a phrase such as sudhī (‘the intelligent’) upāsya (‘to be worshipped’) = sudhyupāsya (‘the intelligent fit to be worshipped, or God’. The long –ī at the end of the first word, sudhī, is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ sound from the yaṆ set, y. It is apparent that the two sets, which have an equal number of members (four in each) are matched in the order given in the siva-sutras: i (and its variants) with y, u with v, ṛ with r, and ḷ with l. A point to note is that each member of the iK also refers to its variants (as regards length, etc.).
The second issue was to do with the meta-language of Panini. In this sutra, there is a clear application of the special sense in which the possessive case, the nominative case, and the locative case of technical terms are used. The paraphrase suggests these conventions: the possessive case denotes ‘in place OF’, the nominative case denotes the item which is used, and the locative case denotes the condition IN which the operation takes place. This special usage of technical terms is explicitly defined as follows:
Laghu 22. Tasminniti nirdişţe pūrvasya (Panini 1.1.66)
We have of course already dealt with this and other meta-rules (see Post 31 here), where we also studied Panini’s sutra 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya. Taking 1.1.66 first, Panini refers to terms in the locative case by tasmin iti, ‘in that, thusly’. The word nirdişţe itself is in the locative case, which I rendered as ‘in the specification (that)’. Tasminniti nirdişţe (‘given the specification in that, or a locative case ending’), pūrvasya (‘of the preceding’) (eva, ‘only’ kāryam bhavati, ‘work transpires, exists’). Sharma calls this a “right context” for the operation itself.
In our example, the presence of a vowel immediately after the iK is required for the substitution to transpire. This is denoted by aCi, locative (seventh or saptamī vibhakti) case form of aC, ‘vowels a to au’. This is what Sharma calls a “right context” for the operation on the preceding item, the iK vowel. So according to this meta-rule, a term in the locative case refers to the mandatory condition or environment that follows (is to the right of) the thing operated on in a phrase.
Ballantyne’s version: “When a term is exhibited in the seventh case, the operation directed is to be understood as affecting the state of what immediately precedes that which the term denotes”.
Admittedly, this is a convoluted sentence that most of us may find difficult to understand. A simpler way of putting it is that a term in the locative case specifies the condition or context required for a certain operation to take place on something which comes before (precedes) it. It may be noted that the meaning and terminology of the case endings are themselves laid out in some other, much later sutras (Laghu 137, to be precise, and similarly in Panini). Thus my understanding that the grammar is not really expected to be used in a linear (first to last) sequence, but in a recursive, even circular, manner. That is what pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps connotes!
The Laghu then goes on to:
Laghu 23. Sthāne antartamaḥ (Panini 1.1.50)
We have already dealt with this one too. It says that when choosing substitutes, we select the closest in place (of order in a list, or place of articulation?) to that which is replaced. A palatal y is put in place of a front vowel i, and so on, out of the two ‘matching’ sets iK and yaṆ, as already explained above.
Now the S-K brings in a number of sutras from later parts of the Panini. This is one of the benefits of following the S-K. There are of course some differences between the Laghu and the full S-K. I will take up the sutras in the Laghu in the next post. I mentioned the other similar meta-rule sutra
Panini 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya.
This is dealt with in the S-K proper in this same section, but is apparently in some other section in the Laghu (this has to be verified!). Very similarly to 1.1.66, this one (1.1.67) lays down that when a (technical) term is used in the ablative case of ‘from that’ (fifth, pañcamī, case), it denotes the condition which gives rise to an operation on a following, or later object (uttarasya kāryam bhavati). Analogously to the previous, Sharma calls this a “left context” for an operation on something to its right, i.e. later in the phrase or sequence. It denotes an ‘if-then’ conditional rule.
The last two posts covered the first section of the Laghu, that to do with defining terms (saṃjñā), with a number of sutras drawn from the first quarter (pāda) of Panini’s first Book (adhyāya), and a few besides from other pāda-s. Now the second section of the Laghu is captioned Ac-sandhiḩ, or Vowel-joining. However, the corresponding section in the full-length S-K is captioned Paribhāṣā-prakaraṇam. We will follow the Laghu in the first instance here.
This section starts off with
Laghu 21. Iko yaṇaci (Panini 6.1.77)
We have referred to this already in the course of Panini’s first pāda. Two issues are in consideration here: one, the import or meaning of this sutra, and the other, the specific significance of the particular case (vibhakti) endings (sUP forms), i.e. the meta-language used by Panini. We have actually already covered these topics; here’s how the Laghu S-K approaches them (Laghu 21):
ikaḥ (possessive case, of the iK = of the vowels i, u, ṛ, ḷ, and their variants) sthāne (in place) yaṇ (nominative case, the yaṆ semi-vowels = y, v, r, l) syāt (let there be), aci (locative case, in [the presence of] the aC = the vowels) saṃhitāyām viṣaye (in the matter of saṅhitā = contact)
Ballantyne’s rendering: “Instead of a letter denoted by the pratyāhāra iK, let there be one denoted by the pratyāhāra yaṆ, in each instance where one denoted by the pratyāhāra aC immediately follows”.
That is, when one of the vowels included in the set iK is followed by any other vowel in “closest proximity” of contact called saṅhitā (see the previous post # 36, here http://readingpanini.blogspot.com/2016/06/36-section-i-of-laghu-siddhanta-kaumudi.html), then the first vowel is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ from the set yaṆ.
The example given is a phrase such as sudhī (‘the intelligent’) upāsya (‘to be worshipped’) = sudhyupāsya (‘the intelligent fit to be worshipped, or God’. The long –ī at the end of the first word, sudhī, is substituted by the corresponding ‘semi-vowel’ sound from the yaṆ set, y. It is apparent that the two sets, which have an equal number of members (four in each) are matched in the order given in the siva-sutras: i (and its variants) with y, u with v, ṛ with r, and ḷ with l. A point to note is that each member of the iK also refers to its variants (as regards length, etc.).
The second issue was to do with the meta-language of Panini. In this sutra, there is a clear application of the special sense in which the possessive case, the nominative case, and the locative case of technical terms are used. The paraphrase suggests these conventions: the possessive case denotes ‘in place OF’, the nominative case denotes the item which is used, and the locative case denotes the condition IN which the operation takes place. This special usage of technical terms is explicitly defined as follows:
Laghu 22. Tasminniti nirdişţe pūrvasya (Panini 1.1.66)
We have of course already dealt with this and other meta-rules (see Post 31 here), where we also studied Panini’s sutra 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya. Taking 1.1.66 first, Panini refers to terms in the locative case by tasmin iti, ‘in that, thusly’. The word nirdişţe itself is in the locative case, which I rendered as ‘in the specification (that)’. Tasminniti nirdişţe (‘given the specification in that, or a locative case ending’), pūrvasya (‘of the preceding’) (eva, ‘only’ kāryam bhavati, ‘work transpires, exists’). Sharma calls this a “right context” for the operation itself.
In our example, the presence of a vowel immediately after the iK is required for the substitution to transpire. This is denoted by aCi, locative (seventh or saptamī vibhakti) case form of aC, ‘vowels a to au’. This is what Sharma calls a “right context” for the operation on the preceding item, the iK vowel. So according to this meta-rule, a term in the locative case refers to the mandatory condition or environment that follows (is to the right of) the thing operated on in a phrase.
Ballantyne’s version: “When a term is exhibited in the seventh case, the operation directed is to be understood as affecting the state of what immediately precedes that which the term denotes”.
Admittedly, this is a convoluted sentence that most of us may find difficult to understand. A simpler way of putting it is that a term in the locative case specifies the condition or context required for a certain operation to take place on something which comes before (precedes) it. It may be noted that the meaning and terminology of the case endings are themselves laid out in some other, much later sutras (Laghu 137, to be precise, and similarly in Panini). Thus my understanding that the grammar is not really expected to be used in a linear (first to last) sequence, but in a recursive, even circular, manner. That is what pulling oneself up by one’s bootstraps connotes!
The Laghu then goes on to:
Laghu 23. Sthāne antartamaḥ (Panini 1.1.50)
We have already dealt with this one too. It says that when choosing substitutes, we select the closest in place (of order in a list, or place of articulation?) to that which is replaced. A palatal y is put in place of a front vowel i, and so on, out of the two ‘matching’ sets iK and yaṆ, as already explained above.
Now the S-K brings in a number of sutras from later parts of the Panini. This is one of the benefits of following the S-K. There are of course some differences between the Laghu and the full S-K. I will take up the sutras in the Laghu in the next post. I mentioned the other similar meta-rule sutra
Panini 1.1.67 tasmād ity uttarasya.
This is dealt with in the S-K proper in this same section, but is apparently in some other section in the Laghu (this has to be verified!). Very similarly to 1.1.66, this one (1.1.67) lays down that when a (technical) term is used in the ablative case of ‘from that’ (fifth, pañcamī, case), it denotes the condition which gives rise to an operation on a following, or later object (uttarasya kāryam bhavati). Analogously to the previous, Sharma calls this a “left context” for an operation on something to its right, i.e. later in the phrase or sequence. It denotes an ‘if-then’ conditional rule.
No comments:
Post a Comment