2023-04-10 05:19:37 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
साहित्यकण्टकोद्धारः
"वः पश्चिमदिगीशे स्याद् वौपम्ये पुनरव्ययम् इति ।
अथ कथम्
(अनेकार्थसंग्रहे – १-१५ )
कटो ना श्रोणिफलकं कटिः श्रोणिः ककुमती-इत्यमरः ।
वृप्तः ककुद्यानिव चित्रकूट :-- (रघुवंशे १३-४७) इति रघुश्च ।
(८-४-४५ इत्यव्रत्येन
ककुमान् इत्यत्न प्रत्यये भाषायां नित्यम् इत्यनेन
वार्तिकेन) नित्यमनुनासिकप्राप्तेरितिचेत् । अनाहुः -- मादुपधायाश्च
मतो र्वोऽयवादिभ्यः (८-२-६) इतिसूत्रस्थयवादिगणे" (ककुद् ) इति
दकारान्तत्वेन पाठात् सर्वापेक्षया गणपाठस्य बलीयस्त्वादिति ।
one.
To support the point
here cannot be an authentic and correct
Bhanoji (and following him our author also) says that Amara does not use
other Taddhita suffixes such as an, phiñ, vuñ etc. while giving the synonyms of
apatya and of samūha. See Amara :
almajas tanayas sūnur apatyam tokam etc., and sam üho nivaha-etc., where these
suffixes are not included.
40. In his Anekārthasamgraha Hemacandra has the following :
vah paścimadigiśe syāt vaupamye punar avyayam ( I.15).
From the words aupamye punar avyayam it appears that Hemacandra means
that va (with short a) as a particle of similitude is indeclinable, whereas in
the sense of Varuņa va is declinable in masculine gender (vaḥ). This style
is adopted by him to bring out the contrast between an avyaya in one sense
and an anavyaya in another. He says later :
a syād abhāve svalpārthe visnāv eşa tv anavyayam (7.1)
The line of Hemacandra ( on va) is similar to the line Medini, which reads :
vam pracetasi jäniyad ivärthe ca tad avyayam.
This Medini is quoted by Bālamanoramā ( on 1.1.11) too.
41. Bhattoji gives this answer in his S. K. (under pratyaye bhāsāyām nityam).
Mallinatha also comments on kakudmantaḥ in Raghu. 4.22 as: yavāditväd
ete.
12. In the light of Bhattoji's comment : yavādigane dakāranipātanāt (see
previous Note), the statement of our ganapathasya baliyastvät is intended to
mean gane drstasya nipatanasya baliyastvät. For the meaning of nipatana Nagesa
says 1
anyádrše prayoge prapte anyädṛśaprayogakaranam.
(Paribhāşendu-, on Abhedakā gunāh)
(Contrary to the ordinary rules of grammar, when a specific form is
noted (by Panini) in a rule, it is intended to show that the specific form so
noted has a greater force and thus the ordinary rules are superseded). Under
Nareadini sarvanāmāni (1.1.27) Patañjali says :
badhakany eva nipätanāni. (See also the Paribhāşendu-).
"वः पश्चिमदिगीशे स्याद् वौपम्ये पुनरव्ययम् इति ।
अथ कथम्
(अनेकार्थसंग्रहे – १-१५ )
कटो ना श्रोणिफलकं कटिः श्रोणिः ककुमती-इत्यमरः ।
वृप्तः ककुद्यानिव चित्रकूट :-- (रघुवंशे १३-४७) इति रघुश्च ।
(८-४-४५ इत्यव्रत्येन
ककुमान् इत्यत्न प्रत्यये भाषायां नित्यम् इत्यनेन
वार्तिकेन) नित्यमनुनासिकप्राप्तेरितिचेत् । अनाहुः -- मादुपधायाश्च
मतो र्वोऽयवादिभ्यः (८-२-६) इतिसूत्रस्थयवादिगणे" (ककुद् ) इति
दकारान्तत्वेन पाठात् सर्वापेक्षया गणपाठस्य बलीयस्त्वादिति ।
one.
To support the point
here cannot be an authentic and correct
Bhanoji (and following him our author also) says that Amara does not use
other Taddhita suffixes such as an, phiñ, vuñ etc. while giving the synonyms of
apatya and of samūha. See Amara :
almajas tanayas sūnur apatyam tokam etc., and sam üho nivaha-etc., where these
suffixes are not included.
40. In his Anekārthasamgraha Hemacandra has the following :
vah paścimadigiśe syāt vaupamye punar avyayam ( I.15).
From the words aupamye punar avyayam it appears that Hemacandra means
that va (with short a) as a particle of similitude is indeclinable, whereas in
the sense of Varuņa va is declinable in masculine gender (vaḥ). This style
is adopted by him to bring out the contrast between an avyaya in one sense
and an anavyaya in another. He says later :
a syād abhāve svalpārthe visnāv eşa tv anavyayam (7.1)
The line of Hemacandra ( on va) is similar to the line Medini, which reads :
vam pracetasi jäniyad ivärthe ca tad avyayam.
This Medini is quoted by Bālamanoramā ( on 1.1.11) too.
41. Bhattoji gives this answer in his S. K. (under pratyaye bhāsāyām nityam).
Mallinatha also comments on kakudmantaḥ in Raghu. 4.22 as: yavāditväd
ete.
12. In the light of Bhattoji's comment : yavādigane dakāranipātanāt (see
previous Note), the statement of our ganapathasya baliyastvät is intended to
mean gane drstasya nipatanasya baliyastvät. For the meaning of nipatana Nagesa
says 1
anyádrše prayoge prapte anyädṛśaprayogakaranam.
(Paribhāşendu-, on Abhedakā gunāh)
(Contrary to the ordinary rules of grammar, when a specific form is
noted (by Panini) in a rule, it is intended to show that the specific form so
noted has a greater force and thus the ordinary rules are superseded). Under
Nareadini sarvanāmāni (1.1.27) Patañjali says :
badhakany eva nipätanāni. (See also the Paribhāşendu-).