Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari
by K. A. Subramania Iyer | 1965 | 391,768 words
The English translation of the Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari including commentary extracts and notes. The Vakyapadiya is an ancient Sanskrit text dealing with the philosophy of language. Bhartrhari authored this book in three parts and propounds his theory of Sphotavada (sphota-vada) which understands language as consisting of bursts of sounds conveyi...
This book contains Sanskrit text which you should never take for granted as transcription mistakes are always possible. Always confer with the final source and/or manuscript.
Verse 2.3
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 2.3:
啶ㄠた啶樴ぞ啶むぞ啶︵た啶掂啶さ啶膏啶ムぞ啶班啶ム 啶多ぞ啶膏啶む啶班 啶い啷� 啶ぐ啶苦き啶距し啶苦い啶 啷�
啶膏ぞ啶曕ぞ啶權啶曕啶粪ぞ啶掂く啶掂 啶む啶� 啶� 啶膏ぐ啷嵿さ啶� 啶む啶侧啶げ啶曕啶粪ぃ啶 啷� 啷� 啷�nigh膩t膩divyavasth膩rtha峁� 艣膩stre yat paribh膩峁tam |
s膩k膩峁卥峁Ｄ乿ayava峁� tena na sarva峁� tulyalak峁峁嘺m || 3 ||3. With the definition of a sentence given in this 艣腻蝉迟谤补 for regulating loss of acute accent etc. the (惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补) definition does not fully tally.
Commentary
The author now discusses whether the definition given by the author of the 痴腻谤迟迟颈办补蝉 and by the 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补s would agree with the above definitions or whether they have a different scope altogether.
[Read verse 3 above]
[碍腻迟测腻测补苍补 gives the following two definitions of a sentence: 腻办丑测腻迟补峁� s膩vyayak膩rakavi艣e峁峁嘺峁� 惫腻办测补尘 and 别办补迟颈峁� 惫腻办测补尘 (v膩 9, 10. M.Bh膩. I, p. 367, 1. 10, 16). The 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补 definition is contained in 惭墨.厂奴. II. 1.42:鈥�arthaikatv膩d eka峁� 惫腻办测补峁� 蝉腻办腻峁卥峁峁� ced vibh膩ge sy膩t. It is referred to in verse 40. In 补测补峁� da峁囜笉o har膩nena, there is syntactical connection (蝉腻尘补谤迟丑测补).
Therefore there should be loss of acute accent (苍颈驳丑腻迟补) in hara by P. 8.2.28 but that is not desired because, according to the definition of 碍腻迟测腻测补苍补 given above, there are here two sentences and 苍颈驳丑腻迟补 takes place only if both the words, the nimitta and the 苍颈尘颈迟迟墨 are in the same sentence. In nady膩sti峁ａ弓hati k奴le, 艣腻濒墨苍腻峁� ta odana峁� d膩sy膩mi, there is no syntactical connection between the first two words and yet 苍颈驳丑腻迟补 in the first case and substitution of te for tava in the second case take place, because the two words are in the same sentence. To decide whether the two words are in the same sentence, one should know what a sentence is and 碍腻迟测腻测补苍补 tells us what it is in the 惫腻谤迟迟颈办补 quoted above. If we follow the 惭墨. definition of a sentence, there would be 苍颈驳丑腻迟补 in hara in the sentence quoted above and that is not desired. So here the two definitions do not tally. In nady膩s ti峁ａ弓hati kule, they do.]
The 惭墨尘腻峁僺补办补 definition is now referred to.