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 3.7.158
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.7.158:
啶ㄠた啶た啶む啶むえ啶苦く啶 啶多が啷嵿う啶距い啷� 啶膏啶え啷嵿ぇ啶膏啶� 啶� 啶椸啶灌啶い啷� 啷�
啶曕ぐ啷嵿ぎ啶啶班さ啶氞え啷�啶啶膏啶む 啶� 啶掂た啶多啶粪啶洁さ啶班啶о啶い啷� 啷� 啷оカ啷� 啷�nimittaniyama岣� 艣abd膩t sa峁僢andhasya na g峁沨yate |
karmapravacan墨yaistu sa vi艣e峁'varudhyate || 158 ||158. The particular (action which is the) cause of the relation is not understood from the words. The post-positions (办补谤尘补辫谤补惫补肠补苍墨测补蝉) relate it to a particular (action).
Commentary
From the relation which is the result, one can infer in a general manner that it must have been preceded by the relation of action and accessory. But how to understand which particular action and accessory?
[Read verse 158 above]
[In some expressions denoting relation but not mentioning any action, the latter can be understood from the nature of the things related, as in 辫颈迟耻岣� 辫耻迟谤补岣� = 鈥榯he father鈥檚 son鈥�, But from the expression 谤腻箩帽补岣� 辫耻谤耻峁岣� = 鈥榯he king鈥檚 man鈥� it is not easy to understand the particular action which has brought about the relation of master and servant. When there is karma-辫谤补惫补肠补苍墨测补, the particular action which brought about the relation can be understood. For example, in the sentence 艣膩kalyasya sa峁僪it膩m anu pr膩var峁t = 鈥榠t rained after the recitation of 厂补峁僪颈迟腻 by 厂腻办补濒测补鈥�, thert is the relation of cause and effect between the recitation and rain and this relation is due to the action of hearing. The post-position 鈥�anu鈥� tells us that it is due to this action because this postposition is seen elsewhere associated with the action of hearing as in 鈥�anu- 苍颈艣补尘测补鈥�. 鈥�Anu鈥� cannot suggest a verb here in the same way as vi suggests the verb 惫颈尘腻测补 in 辫谤腻诲别艣补峁� viparilikhati. Here the word 辫谤腻诲别艣补尘 has a case-ending belonging to a 办腻谤补办补 and so vi can bring a verb expressive of action to the mind. But in 艣膩kalyasya sa峁僪it膩m anu pr膩var峁t, the case-ending is not expressive of 办腻谤补办补, but of 艣别峁. Nor can anu directly expresses the relation of cause and effect, because that is done by the second case-affix which takes the place of the sixth case-affix. The real function of anu is, therefore, to delimit the relation, to say that it is brought about by the particular action of hearing.]
Why are P. 2.3.51 and the following 蝉奴迟谤补蝉 given considering that the sixth case-affix can come in all the cases mentioned in these 蝉奴迟谤补蝉 by P. 2.3.50?