(R1A R2A →) A + B
Which one of the two rules R1A and R2A should we apply at this step? Pāṇini does not give us any explicit instructions about solving SOI. In my view, if two rules are applicable simultaneously to the same operand, the rule that is more specific, which we may call ‘the special or exception rule’, wins. Note that this is similar to the traditional notion that an apavāda ‘exception’ rule defeats an utsarga ‘general’ rule.
It is likely that Pāṇini did not deem it necessary to state explicitly that the exception rule defeats the general rule in case of SOI because the general-exception framework is not a feature of ‘grammar’ alone but more broadly, a feature of the sūtra style itself. Freschi and Pontillo (2013: 2) point out that “the basic framework of Sanskrit śāstras ‘systematic treatises’ is based on the practical and effective opposition between general and specific rules”.
34
Note that the traditional approach is different from mine because:
(i) The tradition does not draw a clear distinction between SOI and DOI.
(ii) The tradition often ends up using tools other than utsarga-apavāda to resolve SOI.
(iii) The tradition has not developed a systematic procedure to determine which of the two rules involved in SOI is more specific.
I will develop such a procedure later in this chapter.
Now, let us look at DOI.
(RA→) A + (RB→) B
The group of examples referred to in section 2.1 are those that involve DOI. I noticed that in the case of DOI, if we pick the right-hand side (henceforth, RHS) operation, that is, application of rule RB to its operand B, over the left-hand side (henceforth, LHS) operation, that is, the application of rule RA to operand A, we always get the correct answer. This led me to realize the meaning of para in 1.4.2: para stands for the RHS operation. And thus, vipratiṣedha ‘mutual opposition’ in 1.4.2 stands for DOI. I think it is apt to refer to DOI as vipratiṣedha ‘mutual opposition’ because only one of the two operations wins, so in that sense, the two operations oppose each other. In sum, 1.4.2 means: ‘in the event of DOI (mutual opposition between the two operations), the RHS operation wins.’
Note that even though in the previous chapter I frequently used the phrase ‘rule conflict’ - which has acquired a very specific connotation in modern Pāṇinian scholarship - to discuss the traditional and modern interpretations of 1.4.2, I have not used this phrase in the context of my own interpretation of 1.4.2. I interpret vipratiṣedha ‘mutual opposition’ as ‘DOI’ and not as ‘rule conflict’. DOI and rule conflict are different concepts. I will discuss this topic in detail later in this chapter.