संस्कृते विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

Now I will discuss examples of DOI conflict, which are of interest to the tradition, and show how my interpretation of 1.4.2 is able to solve these cases. I will also consistently apply my interpretations of 1.4.13 and 6.4.1 respectively in all these examples.

In each example, I will prove the existence of DOI conflict and apply my interpretation of 1.4.2 to solve it. As stated in chapter 2, generally speaking, to deal with examples of DOI conflict, the tradition uses nityatva (for cases of unidirectional blocking), niravakāśatva or its interpretation of 1.4.2, as per convenience. To avoid repetition, I will not mention the traditional solution for each example below.

Note that almost all cases of DOI conflict in derivations of finite verbs and primary derivatives involve unidirectional, and not mutual blocking. We will investigate this further later in this chapter.

Lastly, also note that kr̥danta forms are prātipadikas by 1.2.46 kr̥ttaddhitasamāsāś ca and thus they can take suP affixes by 4.1.1 ṅyāpprātipadikāt. However, in the examples I have discussed in this section, I have not added suP affixes to kr̥danta forms. This is purely to avoid repetition and redundancy. This does not affect the derivations discussed in this chapter.¹ For example, the first derivation śvi + Ktvā should actually begin in the following manner: śvi + Ktvā 🡪 śvi + Ktvā + sU (4.1.2 su-au-jas…)🡪 śvi + Ktvā (1.1.40 ktvātosunkasunaḥ, 2.4.82 avyayād āpsupaḥ).

[[121]]

Here onwards, the derivation proceeds as follows:

śvayitvā

śvi + Ktvā – ‘to swell’, absolutive

(6.1.15») śvi + (7.2.35») Ktvā

6.1.15 vacisvapiyajādīnām kiti: roots vac ‘to speak’, svap ‘to sleep’, and those headed by yaj ‘to perform sacrifice’ undergo samprasāraṇa when an affix marked with K follows.

7.2.35 ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ: augment iṬ is attached to an ārdhadhātuka affix beginning with vaL (any consonant except y).

If iṬ is attached to Ktvā by 7.2.35, then according to 1.2.18 na ktvā seṭ (which teaches that a Ktvā which has taken the augment iṬ is not treated as marked with K), itvā will no longer be treated as marked with K. And so, 6.1.15, which applies to certain roots which are followed by a K-marked affix, will not be applicable at the following step. So, 7.2.35 blocks 6.1.15. On the other hand, 7.2.35 will still be applicable after the application of 6.1.15. So, 6.1.15 does not block 7.2.35. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, the RHS rule 7.2.35 wins and we get: śvi + itvā. Since itvā can no longer be treated as marked with K, 7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ² causes guṇa of i, thereby giving us śve + itvā. By 6.1.78 eco’yavāyāvaḥ, we get the correct form: śvayitvā.

hatvā

han + Kta – ‘to kill’, past passive participle

h (6.4.15→)a (6.4.37→)n + Kta

6.4.15 anunāsikasya kvijhaloḥ kṅiti: the penultimate vowel of a base which ends in a nasal (anunāsika), is replaced with its long counterpart when affix KvI, or an affix beginning with jhaL ‘a non-nasal stop or a fricative’ and marked with K or Ṅ follows.

[[122]]

6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti: the final nasal of a base marked with anudātta when taught in the Dhātupāṭha, as well as of vanA ‘to like’ and the roots headed by tanU ‘to extend’, is replaced with LOPA when an affix beginning with jhaL ‘a non nasal stop or a fricative’ and marked with K or Ṅ follows.

If n of han is replaced with LOPA by 6.4.37, 6.4.15 will not be applicable at the following step. But if the vowel of han is lengthened by 6.4.15, 6.4.37 will still be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.4.37 and get the correct form hata.

han + jhi – ‘to kill’, present third-person plural

As per my interpretation of 1.4.13, han cannot be called an aṅga with respect to jhi. Thus, rules from the aṅgādhikāra are not applicable at this step. I will not repeat this clarification henceforth and will assume that the reader is by now familiar with it.

han + jhi 🡪 han + ŚaP + jhi (3.1.68 kartari śap25) 🡪 han + LUK + jhi (2.4.72 adiprabhr̥tibhyaḥ śapaḥ26). Now han and LUK cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by jhi, so han + LUK can be written as han, which is an aṅga with respect to jhi. Here, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra (6.4 to 7.4) are applicable:

h a n + jhi

6.4.15 6.4.37 7.1.3

6.4.15 anunāsikasya kvijhaloḥ kṅiti: same as above.

6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti: same as above. 7.1.3 jho’ntaḥ: a jh which constitutes the initial sound of an affix is replaced with ant.

We already know from the previous example that there is a Type 2a (DOI conflict) between 6.4.15 and 6.4.37, and that 6.4.37 wins. So now let us consider the relationship between 6.4.37 and 7.1.3.

123

If we apply 6.4.37 at this step, 7.1.3 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.1.3 at this step, the affix will no longer begin with a jhaL sound, and therefore 6.4.37 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, the RHS rule 7.1.3 wins, and we get han + anti 🡪 hn + anti (6.4.98 gamahanajanakhanaghasāṁ lopaḥ kṅity anaṅi27) 🡪 ghnanti (7.3.54 ho hanter ñṇinneṣu28), which is the correct form.

kramU + Ktvā – ‘to stride’, absolutive

kramU + Ktvā

6.4.18 7.2.56

6.4.18 kramaś ca ktvi: the penultimate vowel of kramU ‘stride’, is optionally replaced with its long counterpart when affix Ktvā, beginning with jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative), follows.

7.2.56 udito vā: augment iṬ is, optionally, attached to affix Ktvā when it follows a verbal root marked with U.

If, by 7.2.56, the iṬ augment is attached to Ktvā, then 6.4.18, which requires the affix to begin a specific kind of consonant, will not be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 6.4.18, 7.2.56 will still be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.56 and get the correct form: kramitvā.

Note that both 6.4.18 and 7.2.56 are optional rules. So, for each of these rules we have a choice. We can either implement the rule or not do so. Let us consider what happens in different scenarios:

124

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.56, we get:

(i) krantvā, if we do not implement the optional rule 6.4.18; and

(ii) krāntvā, if we do implement the optional rule 6.4.18.

If we implement 7.2.56 but not 6.4.18, we get, again, krāntvā.

All three forms, krantvā, krāntvā and kramitvā are correct.

atikram + Ktvā – ‘to surpass’, absolutive

atikram + Ktvā

6.4.18 7.1.3729

6.4.18 kramaś ca ktvi: same as above.

7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap: in a compound, the first member of which is not naÑ, the affix Ktvā in the second member of the compound is replaced with LyaP.

If we apply 7.1.37, LyaP replaces Ktvā and so 6.4.18 will not be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 6.4.18, 7.1.37 will still be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.37 and get the correct form: atikramya.

It is important to point out an anomaly here. Pāṇini’s rule 2.2.18 kugatiprādayaḥ teaches that the particle ku, items termed gati (including ati) and items belonging to the group headed by pra (which also includes ati) combine with syntactically related padas to form tatpuruṣa compounds. We know, thanks to 2.1.4 saha supā, that a compound is composed of forms ending in suP. Since the three forms krantvā / krāntvā / kramitvā (see example 4 of this section)

125

end in suP (which is replaced with LUK by 2.4.82 avyayād āpsupaḥ), ati can combine with any of these forms to construct a tatpuruṣa compound. Let us consider each of the three scenarios:

a. Compound between ati and krantvā.

By 7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap, we replace Ktvā with LyaP and get *atikranya, which is not the correct form.

b. Compound between ati and krāntvā.

By 7.1.37, we replace Ktvā with LyaP and get *atikrānya, which is also not the correct form. c. Compound between ati and kramitvā.

By 7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap, we replace Ktvā with LyaP and get atikramiya 🡪 *atikramitya (6.1.71 hrasvasya piti kr̥ti tuk), which is not the correct form.

To derive the correct form, we have to start the derivation by adding the verbal root kram to ati which constitutes the pūrvapada. To that, we add affix Ktvā: atikram + Ktvā. This alone gives us the correct answer.30 We see the same phenomenon in examples 6-8 below. But this runs contrary to how we generally construct compounds – by combining two or more subanta forms.

Thus, the following question arises: if it is difficult to derive atikramya correctly as a compound, why does Pāṇini want us to view atikramya as a compound in the first place? This likely has to do with accentuation, which is not the focus of this thesis. The distinction between atikramya and atikrāmati (where ati is only a morpho-syntactically bound particle cf. 1.4.8 te prāg dhātoḥ), the status of particles like ati in Vedic and the relationship between Ktvā and LyaP in Vedic can all shed more light on this matter, but we cannot delve into these topics here.

126

prasthā + Ktvā – ‘to depart’, absolutive

prasthā + Ktvā

7.4.40 7.1.37

7.4.40 dyatisyatimāsthām it ti kiti: a short i replaces the final sound of do ‘to cut’, ṣo ‘to end, terminate’, mā ‘to measure’ and sthā ‘to stay’, when a t-initial affix marked with K follows.

7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap: same as above.

If we replace Ktvā with LyaP by 7.1.37, the affix no longer begins with t and thus 7.4.40 will not be applicable at the following step. On the other hand, if we apply 7.4.40, 7.1.37 will still be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.37 which gives the correct form: prasthāya.

āgam + Ktvā – ‘to come’, absolutive

āgam + Ktvā

6.4.37 7.1.37

6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti: the final nasal of a base marked with anudātta when taught in the Dhātupāṭha, as well as of vanA ‘to like’ and the roots headed by tanU ‘to extend’, is replaced with LOPA when an affix beginning with jhaL (a non nasal stop or a fricative) and marked with K or Ṅ follows.

7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap: same as above.

If we replace Ktvā with LyaP by 7.1.37, the affix no longer begins with jhaL and thus 6.4.37 will not be applicable at the following step. On the other hand, if we apply 6.4.37, 7.1.37 will still be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

127

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.37 and get: āgam + tvā 🡪 āgam + ya (7.1.37) 🡪 āga + ya (6.4.38 vā lyapi31) 🡪 āgatya (6.1.71 hrasvasya piti kr̥ti tuk32), which is the correct form. Note that the application of 6.4.38 is optional. If we do not implement this rule, we get āgamya, which is also correct.

praveÑ + Ktvā – ‘to weave’, absolutive

praveÑ + Ktvā

6.1.15 7.1.37

6.1.15 vacisvapiyajādīnām kiti: roots vac ‘to speak’, svap ‘to sleep’, and those headed by yaj ‘to perform sacrifice’ undergo samprasāraṇa when an affix marked with K follows.

7.1.37 samāse’nañpūrve ktvo lyap: same as above.

If we apply 6.1.15 at this step, 7.1.37 will still be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.1.37 at this step, then by 6.1.41 lyapi ca (which teaches that veÑ does not undergo samprasāraṇa when LyaP follows), 6.1.15, which teaches samprasāraṇa, will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.37 and get: prave + ya 🡪 pravāya (6.1.45 ād eca upadeśe’śiti33), which is the correct form.

128

śās + siP – ‘to instruct’, imperative second-person singular

śās + siP

3.1.68 3.4.87

3.1.68 kartari śap: affix ŚaP occurs after a verbal root when a sārvadhātuka affix which denotes kartr̥ ‘agent’ follows.

3.4.87 ser hy apic ca: a siP replacement of LOṬ is replaced with hi and is treated as if not marked with P.

These two rules do not block each other. This is not a case of conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.87 and get śās + hi 🡪 śās + ŚaP + hi (3.1.68) 🡪 śās + hi (2.4.72 adiprabhr̥tibhyaḥ śapaḥ34). śās can now be called an aṅga with respect to hi (cf. my interpretation of 1.4.13). Thus, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

śās + hi

6.4.34 6.4.35 7.1.35

6.4.34 śāsa id aṅhaloḥ: the penultimate sound of śās, is replaced with short i when followed by aṄ, or an affix that begins with a consonant and is marked with K or Ṅ.35

6.4.35 śā hau: śās is replaced with śā when affix hi follows.

7.1.35 tuhyos tātaṅ āśiṣy anyatarasyām: affixes tu and hi are optionally replaced with tātAṄ, provided benediction (āśiḥ) is denoted.36

129

Here, we see that there is an SOI interaction between 6.4.34 and 6.4.3537 and a DOI interaction between them and 7.1.35. Let’s first deal with the SOI between 6.4.34 and 6.4.35. 6.4.35 is more specific because it pertains to the hi affix alone and thus wins38. So now let us discuss the relationship between 6.4.35 and 7.1.35.

If we apply 6.4.35, 7.1.35 will still be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.1.35, hi will be replaced with tātAṄ and thus 6.4.35 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.35 and get: śās + tāt 🡪 śis + tāt (6.4.34 śāsa idaṅhaloḥ) 🡪 śiṣṭāt (8.3.60 śāsivasighasīnāṁ ca, 8.4.41 ṣṭunā ṣṭuḥ), which is the correct form.

han + siP – ‘to hurt’, imperative second-person singular

han + siP

3.1.68 3.4.87

3.1.68 kartari śap: same as above.

3.4.87 ser hy apic ca: same as above.

Neither of the two rules blocks the other. This is a case of DOI non-conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.87 and get han + hi 🡪 han + ŚaP + hi (3.1.68) 🡪 han + hi (2.4.72 adiprabhr̥tibhyaḥ śapaḥ). han can now be called an aṅga with respect to hi (cf. my interpretation of 1.4.13). Thus, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

130han + hi

6.4.36 6.4.37 7.1.35

6.4.36 hanter jaḥ: the root han is replaced with ja when the affix hi follows.

6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti: the final nasal of a base marked with anudātta when taught in the Dhātupāṭha, as well as of vanA ‘to like’ and the roots headed by tanU ‘to extend’, is replaced with LOPA when an affix beginning with jhaL (a non nasal stop or a fricative) and marked with K or Ṅ follows.39

7.1.35 tuhyos tātaṅ āśiṣy anyatarasyām: same as above.

There is an SOI relationship between 6.4.36 and 6.4.37. 6.4.36 is specifically taught for han + hi and so it is clearly more specific than 6.4.37. So, we put 6.4.37 aside. Now let us consider the relationship between 6.4.36 and 7.1.35.

If we apply 6.4.36 at this step, 7.1.35 will still be applicable at the following step. However, if we replace hi with tātAṄ by 7.1.35 at this step, then 6.4.36, which applies only when han is followed by hi, will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.35 and get han + tātAṄ 🡪 hatāt (6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti), which is the correct form.

131

radh + ṆiC40 – ‘to subdue’, causative present third-person singular

radh is an aṅga with respect to ṆiC. ṆiC can trigger two operations from the aṅgādhikāra on radh namely 7.2.116 and 7.1.67.

r a dh + ṆiC

7.2.116 7.1.61 3.2.123 7.2.116 ata upadhāyāḥ: a vowel termed vr̥ddhi replaces the penultimate sound a of a verbal base when an affix marked with Ṇ or Ñ follows.

7.1.61 radhijabhor aci: augment nUM is attached to radhA ‘to subdue’ and jabhA ‘to gape’ when an affix beginning with a vowel follows.

3.2.123 vartamāne laṭ: affix LAṬ occurs after a verbal root when the action is denoted at the current time (vartamāna).

3.2.123 neither blocks nor is blocked by the other two rules. Let us look at the relationship between 7.2.116 and 7.1.61.

If we apply 7.2.116, 7.1.61 will still be applicable at the following step. However, if we apply 7.1.61, that is, if we insert the augment nUM before the final dh (cf. 1.1.47 mid aco’ntyāt paraḥ), then a is no longer the penultimate sound, and so 7.2.116 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right-most rule 3.2.123 get radh + ṆiC + LAṬ. Here, the following rules are applicable:

r a dh + ṆiC + LAṬ

7.2.116 7.1.61 3.4.78 7.2.116 ata upadhāyāḥ: same as above.

7.1.61 radhijabhor aci: same as above.

3.4.78 tip-tas-jhi-sip-thas-tha-mib-vas-mas-ta-ātāṁ-jha-thās-āthāṁ-dhvam-iḍ-vahi-mahiṅ 40 3.1.26 hetumati ca.

132

We have already discussed the relationship between 7.2.116 and 7.1.61. 3.4.78 neither blocks nor is blocked by the other two rules.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right most rule 3.4.78 and get radh + ṆiC + tiP. At this step, multiple rules are applicable:

r a dh + ṆiC + tiP

7.2.116 7.1.61 3.1.68

7.2.116 ata upadhāyāḥ: same as above.

7.1.61 radhijabhor aci: same as above.

3.1.68 kartari śap: same as above.

We have already discussed the relationship between 7.2.116 and 7.1.61. 3.1.68 neither blocks nor is blocked by the other two rules.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right most rule 3.1.68 and get: radh + ṆiC + ŚaP + tiP. At this point, two rules are applicable:

r a dh + ṆiC + ŚaP + tiP

7.2.116 7.1.61

We have already established that there is a DOI conflict between 7.2.116 and 7.1.61.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.61 and get randh + ṆiC + ŚaP + tiP. randh and ṆiC cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by ŚaP, so we can write randh + ṆiC as randhi. randhi is an aṅga with respect to ŚaP. Thus by 7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ41, which belongs to the aṅgādhikāra and is triggered here by ŚaP, is applicable to randhi. Upon its application, we get randhe + a + ti 🡪 randhaya + ti (6.1.78 eco’yavāyāvaḥ) 🡪 randhayati, which is the correct form.

133

glai + tiP – ‘to become tired’, present third-person singular

glai + tiP

6.1.45 3.1.68

6.1.45 ād eca upadeśe’śiti: the final sound of a verbal root which ends in eC when taught in the Dhātupāṭha is replaced with ā, when an affix which is not marked with Ś follows.

3.1.68 kartari śap: same as above.

If we apply 6.1.45 at this step, 3.1.68 will be applicable at the following step. But if we add the affix ŚaP at this step by 3.1.68, then 6.1.45 will not be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my application of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.68 and get the correct form: glai + a + ti 🡪 glāyati (6.1.78 eco’yavāyāvaḥ).

dr̥ś + tumUN – ‘to see’, infinitive

d r̥ ś + tumUN

7.3.86 6.1.58

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: guṇa replaces iK (i, u, r̥, l̥) of a verbal base which ends in the augment pUK or which has a laghu ‘light’ vowel as its penultimate sound when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows.

6.1.58 sr̥jidr̥śor jhaly am akiti: augment aM is attached to verbal roots sr̥j ‘to release, project’ and dr̥śIR ‘to look’ before an affix which begins with a jhaL, but is not marked with K.

If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, 6.1.58 will still be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 6.1.58 at this step, r̥ will no longer be the penultimate vowel and so 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.1.58 and get dr̥aś + tum 🡪 draś + tum (6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci) 🡪 draṣ + tum (8.2.36 vraścabhrasjasr̥jamr̥jayajarājabhrājacchaśāṁ ṣaḥ) 🡪 draṣṭum (8.4.41 ṣṭunā ṣṭuḥ), which is the correct form.

134

bhū + tiP – ‘to be’, aorist third-person singular

bhū + ti

3.1.43 3.4.100

3.1.43 cli luṅi: affix cli is added to a verbal root when LUṄ follows.

3.4.100 itaś ca: the i of a replacement of any lakāra marked with Ṅ, is replaced with LOPA.

There is no conflict between the two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.100 and get: bhū + t. At this step, only one rule, namely 3.1.43 is applicable. On applying this rule, we get bhū + cli + tiP. Since bhū is an aṅga with respect to cli, 7.3.84 from the aṅgādhikāra is applicable here, and so is 3.1.44:

bhū + cli + t

7.3.84 3.1.44

7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ: guṇa replaces the final sound iK of a verbal base when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows.

3.1.44 cleḥ sic: cli is replaced with sIC.

There is no conflict between these two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.44 and get bhū + sIC + t. Here three rules are applicable:

bhū + sIC + t

7.3.84 7.2.1 2.4.77

7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ: same as above.

7.2.1 sici vr̥ddhiḥ parasmaipadeṣu: the final sound iK of a verbal base is replaced with its vr̥ddhi counterpart before a sIC that is followed by a parasmaipada affix.

2.4.77 gātisthāghupābhūbhyaḥ sicaḥ parasmaipadeṣu: affix sIC is replaced with LUK when it is located after gā ‘to go’, sthā ‘to stand’, ghu ‘a root termed ghu’, pā ‘to drink’, or bhū ‘to be, become’ and before a parasmaipada affix.

135

There is an SOI relationship between 7.3.84 and 7.2.1. Since 7.2.1 has been taught for bases followed by sIC, it is more specific and thus wins. Now let us look at the relationship between 7.2.1 and 2.4.77.

If we apply 7.2.1 at this step, 2.4.77 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 2.4.77 at this step, 7.2.1 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 2.4.77 and get bhū + t. bhū can now be called an aṅga with respect to t. Note that t cannot trigger guṇa of the ū of bhū due to the following rule:

7.3.88 bhūsuvos tiṅi: a guṇa vowel does not replace the iK of bhū ‘to be’ and sū ‘to give birth to’ when a sārvadhātuka tiṄ affix follows.

So only one rule from the aṅgādhikāra, namely 6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ, which is triggered by t is applicable. It teaches that the udātta augment aṬ is attached to a verbal base when affixes LUṄ, LAṄ and LR̥Ṅ follow. On applying this rule, we get the correct form: abhūt.

grah + tiP – ‘to obtain’, aorist third-person singular

The first couple of steps of this derivation are similar to the previous one. I will mention them in brief here and focus on the step which involves conflict.

grah + tiP 🡪 grah + t (3.4.100 itaś ca) 🡪 grah + cli + t (3.1.43 cli luṅi) 🡪 grah + sIC + t (3.1.44 cleḥ sic).

grah + sIC + t

7.2.3 7.2.35

7.2.3 vadavrajahalantasyācaḥ: a vowel termed vr̥ddhi replaces the vowel of vad ‘to speak’, vraj ‘to wander’, and a verbal base ending in a consonant, before a sIC which is followed by a parasmaipada affix.

7.2.35 ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ: augment iṬ is attached to an ārdhadhātuka affix beginning with vaL (any consonant except y).

136

If we apply 7.2.3 at this step, 7.2.35 will be applicable at the following step. But if we attach the augment iṬ to sIC by 7.2.35 at this step, 7.2.3 will not be applicable at the following step, due to 7.2.5:

7.2.5 hmyantakṣaṇaśvasajāgr̥ṇiśvyeditām: a vowel termed vr̥ddhi does not come in place of the vowel of verbal bases (i) ending in h, m, y; or (ii) kṣaṇA ‘to harm’, śvasA ‘to breathe’ and jāgr̥ ‘to wake up’; or (iii) ending in the affix Ṇi; or (iv) śvi ‘to swell’; or (v) marked with E; before an iṬ-initial sIC which is followed by a parasmaipada affix.42

In conclusion, if we apply 7.2.35 at this step, 7.2.3 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.35 and get grah + is + t. grah and is cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by t, thus we can write grah + is as grahis. grahis is an aṅga with respect to t. The following rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

grahis + t

6.4.71 7.3.96

6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ: same as above.

7.3.96 astisico’pr̥kte: augment īṬ is attached to a consonant-initial sārvadhātuka affix which consists of only one sound (apṛkta) and occurs after the verbal base as or affix sIC.

There is no conflict between these rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2 we apply the RHS rule 7.3.96 and get grahis + īt. At this step, we apply 6.4.71 and get agrahis + īt. Now that all possible rules from the sapādasaptādhyāyī have been applied, we apply 8.2.28 iṭa īṭi from the

137

tripādī which replaces the s between iṬ and īṬ with LOPA. This gives us the correct form: agrahiīt 🡪 agrahīt (6.1.101 akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ).43

gupU + tiP – ‘to hide’, aorist third-person singular44

gup + tiP

3.1.43 3.4.100

3.1.43 cli luṅi: same as above.

3.4.100 itaś ca: same as above.

There is no conflict between these two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.100 and get gup + t. By my interpretation of 1.4.13, gup is not an aṅga with respect to t, so rules like 7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca which are taught in the aṅgādhikāra and which are triggered by t cannot apply here. By applying 3.1.43, we get gup + cli + t. Here the following rules are applicable:

gup + cli + t

7.3.86 3.1.44

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: guṇa replaces the iK (i, u, r̥, l̥) of a verbal base which ends in the augment pUK or which has a laghu ‘light’ vowel as its penultimate sound when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows.

3.1.44 cleḥ sic: same as above.

There is no conflict between the two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.44 and get: gup + sIC + t. Here multiple rules are applicable:

138

gup + sIC + t

7.3.86 7.2.3 7.2.44

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: same as above.

7.2.3 vadavrajahalantasyācaḥ: same as above.

7.2.44 svarati-sūti-sūyati-dhūñ-ūdito vā: augment iṬ is introduced to an ārdhadhātuka affix which begins with vaL (any consonant except y), provided the same occurs after svr̥ ‘resound’, ṣūṄ (adādi) ‘give birth to’, ṣūṄ (divādi) ‘give birth to’, dhūÑ ‘to shake’, and roots marked with Ū.

There is an SOI relationship between 7.3.86 and 7.2.3. 7.2.3 has been taught specifically for a set of verbs followed by sIC, and thus wins. Now let us look at the DOI relationship between 7.2.44 and 7.2.3.

If we apply 7.2.3 at this step, 7.2.44 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.44 at this step, then 7.2.3 will not be applicable at the following step, because of 7.2.4 neṭi which prohibits vr̥ddhi of the vowel of a consonant-final base when the following sIC has taken the augment iṬ.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.44 and get gup + is + t. By 7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca, we get gop + is + t. Note that, gop and is cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by t. Thus, we can write gop + is as gopis. gopis is an aṅga with respect to t.

I will not go into the depth of the remaining steps of this derivation because we have seen these steps in a similar derivation above: gopis + t 🡪 gopis + īt (7.3.96 astisico’pr̥kte) 🡪 agopis + īt (6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ) 🡪 agopi + īt (8.2.28 iṭa īṭi) 🡪 agopīt (6.1.101 akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ), which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.44, we get: gup + s + t 🡪 gaups + t (7.2.3 vadavrajahalantasyācaḥ) 🡪 gaups + īt (7.3.96 astisico’pr̥kte) 🡪 agaupsīt (6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ), which is also correct.

139

bhid + ta – ‘to break’, aorist third-person singular

bhid + ta 🡪 bhid + cli + ta (3.1.43 cli luṅi)

bhid + cli + ta

7.3.86 3.1.44

3.1.44 cleḥ sic: same as above.

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: same as above.

If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, 3.1.44 will be applicable at the following step. But, if we apply 3.1.44 at this step, 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step because of 1.2.11:

1.2.11 liṅsicāv ātmanepadeṣu: a LIṄ or sIC affix which begins with a jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative) and occurs after a consonant preceded by an iK (i, u, ṛ, ḷ) is treated as if marked with K, before ātmanepada endings.

By 1.2.11 sIC is treated as marked with K. So, if we apply 3.1.44 at this step, sIC, marked by K, will not trigger guṇa (here, 7.3.86), thanks to 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.44 and get bhid + s + ta 🡪 bhids + ta 🡪 abhids + ta (6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ) 🡪 abhidta (8.2.26 jhalo jhali) 🡪 abhitta (8.4.55 khari ca), which is the correct form.

ūrṇuÑ + tiP – ‘to cover’, simple future third-person singular

ūrṇuÑ + tiP 🡪 ūrṇuÑ + sya + tiP (3.1.33 syatāsī lr̥luṭoḥ).

ūrṇu + sya + tiP

7.3.84 7.2.35

7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ: guṇa replaces the final iK (i, u, ṛ, ḷ) of a verbal base when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows.

7.2.35 ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ: augment iṬ is attached to an ārdhadhātuka affix beginning with vaL (any consonant except y).

140If we apply 7.3.84 at this step, 7.2.35 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.35 at this step, 7.3.84 will not be applicable at the following step due to 1.2.3:

1.2.3 vibhāṣorṇoḥ: an affix with initial augment iṬ is optionally treated as marked with Ṅ when it occurs after ūrṇuÑ.

So, if we apply 7.2.35, and treat the resultant iṣya as marked with Ṅ, then by 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, 7.3.84 will not be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.35 and get: ūrṇu + iṣya + ti 🡪 ūrṇuviṣyati (6.4.77 aci śnudhātubhruvāṁ yvor iyaṅuvaṅau45).

On the other hand, if we do not implement the optional rule 1.2.3, then the derivation proceeds as follows: ūrṇu + iṣya + tiP (7.2.35 ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ) 🡪 ūrṇo + iṣya + tip (7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ) 🡪 ūrṇaviṣyati (6.1.78 eco’yavāyāvaḥ).

bhū + tiP – ‘to be’, āśīrliṅ (benedictive) third-person singular

Since no vikaraṇa is added between bhū and tiP in āśīrliṅ forms, at this step, bhū can be called an aṅga with respect to tiP.

bhū + t i

7.3.84 3.4.103 3.4.100 7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ: same as above.

3.4.103 yāsuṭ parasmaipadeṣūdātto ṅic ca: udātta ‘high-pitched’ augment yāsUṬ is attached to parasmaipada substitutes of LIṄ, and is treated as marked with Ṅ.

3.4.100 itaś ca: the i of a replacement of any lakāra marked with Ṅ, is replaced with LOPA.

3.4.100 neither blocks nor is blocked by the other two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right most rule 3.4.100 and get bhū + t. Here two rules are applicable:

141

bhū + t

7.3.84 3.4.103

If we apply 7.3.84 at this step, 3.4.103 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 3.4.103 at this step, 7.3.84, which prescribes guṇa of ū, will not be applicable at the following step. This is because, yāsUṬ is marked with Ṅ and thus by 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, guṇa is blocked.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.103 and get bhū + yāst. Here, again, two rules are applicable:

bhūyā [st]

8.2.23 8.2.29

8.2.23 saṁyogāntasya lopaḥ: the final sound of a conjunct which occurs at the end of a pada is replaced with LOPA.

8.2.29 skoḥ saṁyogādyor ante ca: the initial s and k of a conjunct which occurs at the end of a pada, or is followed by jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative), is replaced with LOPA.

Note that both 8.2.23 and 8.2.29 belong to the tripādī section. So, 8.2.29 is asiddha with respect to 8.2.23. However, this does not impact our method of resolving the SOI between them. I will discuss this in chapter 5.

8.2.29 has been taught for a specific set of conjuncts and thus wins, thereby leading to the correct form: bhūyāt.

142

naś + tavyaT – ‘to perish’, optative passive participle

na ś + tavyaT

7.1.60 7.2.45

7.1.60 masjinaśor jhali: augment nUM is attached to ṬUmasjI ‘to sink, immerse’ and naś ‘to perish’ when an affix beginning with jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative) follows.

7.2.45 radhādibhyaś ca: augment iṬ is optionally attached to ārdhadhātuka affixes beginning with vaL (any consonant except y) and occurring after the set of verbal roots beginning with radhA ‘to be subdued’.46

If we apply 7.1.60 at this step, 7.2.45 will still be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.45 at this step, then the affix no longer begins with a jhaL sound, so 7.1.60 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.45 and get: naśitavya, which is the correct form. If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.45, we get: naṁṣṭavya, which is also correct.

143

tr̥p + tumUN – ‘to be satisfied’, infinitive

t r̥ p + tumUN

7.3.86 6.1.59 7.2.45

6.1.59 anudāttasya cardupadhasyānyatarasyām: augment aM is optionally introduced to a verbal root which is anudātta when taught in the Dhātupāṭha and has r̥ as its penultimate sound when an affix beginning with jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative) and not marked with K, follows.

7.2.45 radhādibhyaś ca: same as above.

Let us first consider what happens if we implement both optional rules 6.1.59 and 7.2.45.

Let us first look at the relationship between 7.3.86 and 6.1.59. If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, that will change r̥ to ar, and so 6.1.59, which applies only when the penultimate sound is r̥ will not be applicable at the following step. If we apply 6.1.59 at this step, r̥ will no longer be the penultimate sound, so 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of mutual blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

Now let us study the relationship between 6.1.59 and 7.2.45. If we apply 6.1.59 at this step, 7.2.45 will still be applicable at the following step. If we apply 7.2.45 at this step, the affix will no longer begin with jhaL and thus 6.1.59 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

Lastly, 7.3.86 and 7.2.45 do not block each other.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right-most rule 7.2.45 and get: tr̥p + itum 🡪 tarpitum (7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca), which is the correct form.

If we implement the optional rule 7.2.45 but not the optional rule 6.1.59, we get the same form: tarpitum. However, if we implement 6.1.59 but not 7.2.45, we get tr̥ap + tum (6.1.59) 🡪 traptum (6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci), which is also correct. If we do not implement both 7.2.45 and 6.1.59, we get tarptum (7.3.86), which is also correct.

144

divU + Ktvā – ‘to gamble’, absolutive

divU + Ktvā

6.4.19 7.2.56

6.4.19 chvoḥ śūḍ anunāsike ca: ch and v of a base are replaced with ś and ūṬH, respectively, when KvI, or an affix beginning with jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative) and marked with K or Ṅ, or beginning with a nasal, follows.

7.2.56 udito vā: augment iṬ is optionally attached to affix Ktvā when it follows a verbal root marked with U.

If we apply 6.4.19 at this step, 7.2.56 will be applicable at the following step. If we attach augment iṬ to tvā by 7.2.56 at this step, then by 1.2.18 na ktvā seṭ47, Ktvā cannot be treated as marked with K. Thus, 6.4.19 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.56 and get: div + itvā. Since itvā cannot be treated as marked with K, it can no longer block guṇa and vr̥ddhi (i.e., 1.1.5 kṅiti ca does not hold). Thus, by 7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca, we get devitvā, which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.56, we get: div + tvā 🡪 diū + tvā (6.4.19 chvoḥ śūḍ anunāsike ca) 🡪 dyūtvā (6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci), which is also correct.

145

khanU + Ktvā – ‘to dig’, absolutive

khanU + Ktvā

6.4.42 7.2.56

6.4.42 janasanakhanāṁ sañjhaloḥ: the final sound of janA ‘to generate’, sanA ‘to gain’, and khanU ‘to dig’, is replaced with ā when saN or an affix beginning with jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative) and marked with K or Ṅ follows.

7.2.56 udito vā: same as above.

If we apply 6.4.42 at this step, 7.2.56 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.56 at this step, the affix will no longer begin with jhaL and so 6.4.42 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.56 and get khanitvā, which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.56, we get kha-ā + tvā 🡪 khātvā (6.1.101 akaḥ savarṇe dīrghaḥ), which is also correct.

kr̥ + siP – ‘to make’, imperative second-person singular

kr̥ + siP

3.1.79 3.4.87

3.1.79 tanādikr̥ñbhya uḥ: affix u is added after verbal roots belonging to the set headed by tanU ‘to stretch’ and also after kr̥Ñ ‘to make’ when a sārvadhātuka affix which denotes kartr̥ follows.

3.4.87 ser hy apic ca: a siP replacement of LOṬ is replaced with hi and is treated as if not marked with P.

There is no conflict between these rules.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.87 and get kr̥ + hi. Thereafter, the derivation proceeds as follows kr̥ + hi 🡪 kr̥ + u + hi (3.1.79 tanādikr̥ñbhya uḥ) 🡪 karu + hi (7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ). karu is an aṅga with respect to hi, so the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra are applicable:

146

k a ru + hi

6.4.110 6.4.106

6.4.110 ata ut sārvadhātuke: the a of base which is constituted by kr̥, and ends in affix u, is replaced with u when a sārvadhātuka affix marked with K or Ṅ follows.

6.4.106 utaś ca pratyayād asaṁyogapūrvāt: hi is replaced with LUK when it is preceded by a base that ends in affix u, such that u is not preceded by a conjunct.

Note that both these rules fall under the heading rule 6.4.22 asiddhavat atrābhāt. I interpret this rule as: till 6.4.129 bhasya, any rule will treat any other rule here (i.e., in this section) as asiddhavat’. In my opinion, if A treats B as asiddhavat, A acknowledges the existence of B, but not the outcome of the application of B’. I will discuss this interpretation in detail in chapter

Since 6.4.110 and 6.4.106 acknowledge each other’s existence, we can use 1.4.2 to deal with this case of DOI.

If we apply 6.4.110 at this step, 6.4.106 will be applicable at the following step. But if we replace hi with LUK by 6.4.106, 6.4.110 will not be applicable at the following step48. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.4.106 and get karu. Since 6.4.106 is asiddhavat with respect to 6.4.110, 6.4.110 does not acknowledge the outcome of the application of 6.4.106. Thus 6.4.110 applies, and we get the correct form: kuru.

147

as + siP – ‘to be’, imperative (āśiṣi ‘benediction’) second-person singular as + siP

3.1.68 3.4.87

3.1.68 kartari śap: affix ŚaP occurs after a verbal root when a sārvadhātuka affix which denotes kartr̥ ‘agent’ follows.

3.4.87 ser hy apic ca: same as above.

There is no conflict between these rules.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.87 and get as + hi. Then, the derivation proceeds as follows: as + hi 🡪 as + ŚaP + hi (3.1.68 kartari śap) 🡪 as + hi (2.4.72 adiprabhr̥tibhyaḥ śapaḥ). Since as is an aṅga with respect to hi, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra are applicable:

a s + hi

6.4.111 6.4.119 7.1.35 6.4.101 6.4.111 śnasor allopaḥ: the a of affix ŚnaM and of root as, is replaced with LOPA when a sārvadhātuka affix marked with K or Ṅ follows.

6.4.119 ghvasor ed dhāv abhyāsalopaś ca: the final sound of a verbal base termed ghu or of as, is replaced with e when affix hi follows, and abhyāsa (first of two reduplicated syllables) is replaced with LOPA.

7.1.35 tuhyos tātaṅ āśiṣy anyatarasyām: affixes tu and hi are optionally replaced with tātAṄ, provided benediction (āśiḥ) is denoted.

6.4.101 hujhalbhyo her dhiḥ: hi is replaced with dhi when it occurs after root hu or after a verbal base ending in jhaL (a non-nasal stop or a fricative).

There is no conflict between 6.4.111 and 6.4.119.

There is an SOI between 7.1.35 and 6.4.101. 7.1.35 is more specific because it has been taught with respect to benedictive forms.

So now let us look at the relationship between 6.4.119 and 7.1.35. If we apply 6.4.119 at this step, then 7.1.35 will be applicable at the following step. If we replace hi with tātAṄ by 7.1.35

148

at this step, 6.4.119 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we perform the right-most operation 7.1.35 (which defeats 6.4.101 in SOI, as seen above) and get: as + tāt 🡪 stāt (6.4.111 śnasor allopaḥ), which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.1.35, the derivation proceeds as follows: a s + hi

6.4.111 6.4.119 6.4.101

There is no conflict between 6.4.111 and 6.4.119. Let us look at the relationship between 6.4.119 and 6.4.101.

If we apply 6.4.119 at this step, then 6.4.101 will not be applicable at the following step. If we apply 6.4.101 at this step, then 6.4.119 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of mutual blocking.

Note that all three rules belong to the asiddhavat section. So, each rule can see the other two rules but not the outcome of the application of the other two rules. Since these rules can see one another, we can use 1.4.2 to solve the DOI between them.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right-most rule 6.4.101 and get as + dhi. The other two rules cannot see the outcome of the application of 6.4.101. They are still applicable:

a s + dhi

6.4.111 6.4.119

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.4.119 and get ae + dhi. Here, 6.4.111 applies and we get the correct form edhi.

149

bhū + ta – ‘to be’, passive aorist third-person singular

bhū + ta 🡪 bhū + cli + ta (3.1.43 cli luṅi49)

bhū + cli + ta

7.3.84 3.1.66

7.3.84 sārvadhātukārdhadhātukayoḥ: guṇa replaces the final iK (i, u, ṛ, ḷ) of a verbal base when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows.

3.1.66 ciṇ bhāvakarmaṇoḥ: CiṆ occurs in place of affix cli after a verbal base when the LUṄ substitute ta denoting bhāva ‘action’ or karman ‘object’ follows.

There is no conflict between these two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.66 and get bhū + CiṆ + ta. Thereafter, the derivation proceeds as follows: bhū + CiṆ + ta 🡪 bhau + CiṆ + ta (7.2.115 aco ñṇiti50) 🡪 bhāv + CiṆ + ta (6.1.78 eco’yavāyāvaḥ). Since bhāv and CiṆ cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by ta, we can write bhāv + CiṆ as bhāvi. By my interpretation of 1.4.13, bhāvi is an aṅga with respect to ta.

Here, multiple rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

bhāvi + ta

6.4.71 6.4.104

6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ: the udātta ‘high-pitched’ augment aṬ is attached to a verbal base when affixes LUṄ, LAṄ and LR̥Ṅ follow.

6.4.104 ciṇo luk: an affix which occurs after CiṆ is replaced with LUK.

Note that both these rules fall under the heading rule 6.4.22 asiddhavad atrābhāt. They are asiddhavat with respect to each other. That is, each rule acknowledges the existence of the other rule, but not the outcome of the application of the other rule.

150Since 6.4.71 and 6.4.104 acknowledge each other’s existence, we can use 1.4.2 to deal with this case of DOI.

If we apply 6.4.71 at this step, 6.4.104 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 6.4.104 at this step, the affix will be replaced with LUK, and so 6.4.71 will not be applicable at the following step51. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.4.104 and get: bhāvi. Since 6.4.104 is asiddhavat with respect to 6.4.71, 6.4.71 does not acknowledge the outcome of the application of 6.4.104. Consequently, 6.4.71 applies, and we get the correct form: abhāvi.

krī + jhi – ‘to buy’, present third-person plural

krī + jhi 🡪 krī + Śnā + jhi (3.1.81 kryādibhyaḥ śnā52) 🡪 krīnā + jhi. Now that krīnā is an aṅga with respect to jhi, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

krīnā + jhi

6.4.112 6.4.113 7.1.3

6.4.112 śnābhyastayor ātaḥ53: the final ā of a base which ends in Śnā or of a reduplicated base (abhyasta) is replaced with LOPA when a sārvadhātuka affix marked with K or Ṅ follows.

6.4.113 ī haly aghoḥ: the final ā of a base which ends in Śnā or of a reduplicated base (abhyasta), excluding items termed ghu, is replaced with ī when a sārvadhātuka affix beginning with a consonant and marked with K or Ṅ follows.

7.1.3 jho’ntaḥ: jh which is the initial sound of an affix is replaced with ant.

There is an SOI between 6.4.112 and 6.4.113. First let us identify the more specific i.e., winning rule. Then we will examine the DOI between the winning rule and 7.1.3.

151

6.4.113 is more specific because it is applicable only when the affix begins with a consonant, and thus wins. Now let us look at the DOI relationship between 6.4.113 and 7.1.3.

If we apply 6.4.113 at this step, 7.1.3 will be applicable at the following step. However, if we apply 7.1.3 at this step, jhi will no longer begin with a consonant. Thus 6.4.113 will not be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.3 and get: krīnā+ anti. Here, 6.4.112 applies and we get krīṇanti54 which is the correct form.

udvij + ta – ‘to fear’, simple future third-person singular

udvij + ta

3.1.33 3.4.79

3.1.33 syatāsī lr̥luṭoḥ: affixes sya and tāsI respectively occur after verbal bases when LR̥ and LUṬ follow.

3.4.79 ṭita ātmanepadānāṁ ṭer e: the part that begins with the last vowel (ṭi)55 of an ātmanepada replacement of a lakāra marked with Ṭ is replaced with e.

There is no conflict between these rules.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.79 and get udvij + te. Thereafter we apply 3.1.33 and get udvij + sya + te. Here two rules are applicable:

udvij + sya + te

7.3.86 7.2.35

152

7.2.35 ārdhadhātukasyeḍ valādeḥ: augment iṬ is attached to an ārdhadhātuka affix beginning with vaL (any consonant except y).

If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, 7.2.35 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.35 at this step, 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step, because of the following rule:

1.2.2 vija iṭ: an affix with initial augment iṬ is treated as if marked with Ṅ when it occurs after OvijI ‘to fear’.

So, if we apply 7.2.35 at this step, the resultant isya, by 1.2.2, will be treated as marked with Ṅ. Consequently, thanks to 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step.

This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.35 and get: udvijisya + te 🡪 udvijiṣyate (8.3.59 ādeśapratyayoḥ), which is the correct form.

bhī + jhi – ‘to be afraid’, present third-person plural

bhī + jhi 🡪 bhī + ŚaP + jhi (3.1.68 kartari śap) 🡪 bhī + ŚLU + jhi (2.4.75 juhotyādibhyaḥ śluḥ) 🡪 bhībhī + ŚLU + jhi (6.1.10 ślau) 🡪 bhibhī + ŚLU + jhi (7.4.59 hrasvaḥ56).

At this point, bhibhī and ŚLU cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by jhi. Thus, we can write bhibhī + ŚLU as bhibhī. In bhibhī + jhi, bhibhī can now be called an aṅga with respect to jhi. Thus, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra become applicable:

bh i bh ī + jh i

6.4.115 7.1.3 7.1.4

6.4.115 bhiyo’nyatarasyām: the final ī of bhī is optionally replaced with i when an affix beginning with a consonant, and marked with K or Ṅ follows.57

153

7.1.3 jho’ntaḥ: a jh which is the initial sound of an affix is replaced with ant.

7.1.4 ad abhyastāt: when preceded by a reduplicated base, a jh which is the initial sound of an affix is replaced with at.

There is an SOI relationship between 7.1.3 and 7.1.4. Since 7.1.4 has been taught specifically for reduplicated bases, it is more specific and thus wins.

Let us consider the relationship between 7.1.4 and 6.4.115. If we apply 6.4.115 at this step, 7.1.4 will be applicable at the following step. But if, by 7.1.4, we replace jh with at, which starts with a vowel, 6.4.115 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.1.4 (which defeats 7.1.3 in SOI, as seen above) and get: bhibhī + ati 🡪 bhibhy + ati (6.1.77 iko yaṇ aci). Now that all rules from the sapādasaptādhyāyī have applied, we can apply 8.4.54 abhyāse car ca from the tripādī. This gives us bibhyati, which is the correct form.

Note that the optional rule 6.4.115 bhiyo’nyatarasyām, despite being applicable, does not actually end up applying in this derivation. So even if we had not implemented the optional rule 6.4.115, we would still have got the same form, i.e., bibhyati.

ṇijIR + tiP – ‘to purify’, aorist third-person singular

ṇijIR + tiP

6.1.65 3.1.43 3.4.100

6.1.65 ṇo naḥ: the initial ṇ of a verbal root when taught in the Dhātupāṭha is replaced with n. 3.1.43 cli luṅi: affix cli is added to a verbal root when LUṄ follows.

3.4.100 itaś ca: the i of a replacement of any lakāra marked with Ṅ, is replaced with LOPA.

There is no conflict between these rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right most rule 3.4.100 and get: ṇijIR + t. Here the following rules are applicable:

154

ṇijIR + t

6.1.65 3.1.43

There is no conflict between these rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.43 and get ṇij + cli + t. Here the following rules are applicable:

ṇ i jIR + cli + t

6.1.65 7.3.86 3.1.57 3.1.44

6.1.65 ṇo naḥ: same as above.

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: same as above.

3.1.44 cleḥ sic: cli is replaced with sIC.

3.1.57 irito vā: affix cli is optionally replaced with aṄ after verbal roots marked with IR when a parasmaipada replacement of LUṄ which denotes kartr̥ follows.

6.1.65 is not in conflict with the other rules. There is an SOI relationship between 3.1.44 and 3.1.57. Since 3.1.57 has been specifically taught for roots marked with IR, it wins.

Let us consider the DOI relationship between 7.3.86 and 3.1.57. If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, 3.1.57 will be applicable at the following step. But if we replace cli with aṄ by 3.1.57, then by 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we perform the right most operation 3.1.57 (which defeats 3.1.44 in SOI, as seen above). We get: ṇij + aṄ + t 🡪 nij + aṄ + t (6.1.65). nij and aṄ cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by t, so we can write nij + aṄ as nija. nija is an aṅga with respect to t. Thus, we apply 6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ and get anijat, which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 3.1.57 irito vā, the derivation proceeds as follows: ṇij + cli + t 🡪 ṇij + sIC + t (3.1.44) 🡪 ṇaij + s + t (7.2.3 vadavrajahalantasyācaḥ) 🡪 naij + s

155

t (6.1.65 ṇo naḥ) 🡪 naijs + īt (7.3.96 astisico’pr̥kte) 🡪 anaikṣīt (6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ)58, which is also correct.

sic + tiP – ‘to sprinkle’, aorist third-person singular

This derivation is very similar to the previous one so I will simply focus on the part involving DOI conflict. In the rest of the steps, if two rules are simultaneously applicable, I choose the RHS rule in case of DOI and the more specific rule in case of SOI.

sic + tip 🡪 sic + t (3.4.100 itaś ca) 🡪 sic + cli + t (3.1.43 cli luṅi)

sic + cli + a

7.3.86 3.1.53

7.3.86 pugantalaghūpadhasya ca: same as above.

3.1.53 lipisicihvaś ca: affix cli is replaced with aṄ after verbal roots lip ‘to coat, smear’, sic ‘to pour out, sprinkle’ or hveÑ ‘to call’ when LUṄ which denotes kartr̥ follows.

If we apply 7.3.86 at this step, 3.1.53 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 3.1.53 at this step, then by 1.1.5 kṅiti ca, 7.3.86 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.1.53 and get sic + aṄ + t. sic and aṄ cannot undergo any other operations which are not triggered by t. Thus sic + aṄ can be written as sica. Thereafter 6.4.71 luṅlaṅlr̥ṅṣv aḍ udāttaḥ from the aṅgādhikāra applies, leading to the correct form, asicat.

156

vanU + Ktvā – ‘to desire’, absolutive

v a n + Ktvā

6.4.15 6.4.37 7.2.56

7.2.56 udito vā: augment iṬ is optionally attached to affix Ktvā when it follows a verbal root marked with U.

Let us consider the relationship of 7.2.56 with the other two rules. If we apply 6.4.15 or 6.4.37 at this step, 7.2.56 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.56 at this step, then then both 6.4.14 and 6.4.37 will not be applicable at the following step. Thus, 7.2.56 unidirectionally blocks both 6.4.15 and 6.4.37 and is in a DOI conflict with both of them.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the right most rule 7.2.56 and get vanitvā, which is the correct form.

If we do not implement the optional rule 7.2.56, the derivation proceeds as follows: v a n + Ktvā

6.4.15 6.4.37

If we apply 6.4.15 at this step, 6.4.37 will be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 6.4.37 at this step, 6.4.15 will not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.4.37 and get vatvā, which is also correct.

157

āhan + iṬ – ‘to hit’, optative first-person singular

āhan + iṬ

3.1.68 3.4.106 3.4.102 3.1.68 kartari śap: affix ŚaP occurs after a verbal root when a sārvadhātuka affix which denotes kartr̥ ‘agent’ follows.

3.4.102 liṅas sīyuṭ: a substitute of LIṄ receives the augment sīyUṬ.

3.4.106 iṭo’t: iṬ, which is the first-person singular ātmanepada substitute of LIṄ, is replaced with aT.

3.1.68 neither blocks nor is blocked by the other rules. There is an SOI relationship between 3.4.106 and 3.4.102, and 3.4.106 wins because it has been specifically taught for iṬ.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.106 (which defeats 3.4.102 in SOI, as stated above) and get āhan + aT. Here two rules are applicable:

āhan + aT

3.1.68 3.4.102

As stated before, there is no conflict between these two rules. By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 3.4.102 and get āhan + sīya. Thereafter the derivation proceeds as follows: āhan + sīya 🡪 āhan + ŚaP + sīya (3.1.68 kartari śap) 🡪 āhan + sīya (2.4.72 adiprabhr̥tibhyaḥ śapaḥ). Now āhan can be called an aṅga with respect to sīya. Thus, the following rules from the aṅgādhikāra are applicable:

āha n + s īya

6.4.37 7.2.79

6.4.37 anudāttopadeśavanatitanotyādīnām anunāsikalopo jhali kṅiti: same as above.

7.2.79 liṅaḥ salopo’nantyasya: the non-final s of a sārvadhātuka substitute of LIṄ is replaced with LOPA.

If we apply 6.4.37 at this step, 7.2.79 will still be applicable at the following step. But if we apply 7.2.79 at this step, āhan will no longer be followed by a jhaL sound and thus 6.4.37 will

158

not be applicable at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking, and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 7.2.79 and get āhan + īya. Thereafter, the derivation proceeds as follows: āhn + īya (6.4.98 gamahanajanakhanaghasāṁ lopaḥ kṅity anaṅi59) 🡪 āghnīya (7.3.54 ho hanter ñṇinneṣu60), which is the correct form.

vyadh + Ktvā – ‘to hurt’, absolutive

v y adh + Ktvā

6.1.16 6.1.16

6.1.16 grahijyāvayivyadhivaṣṭivicativr̥ścatipr̥cchatibhr̥jjatīnāṁ ṅiti ca: verbal roots grahA ‘to grab, seize’, jyā ‘to decay, grow old’, vay (a substitute of veÑ ‘to weave’ by 2.4.41 veño vayiḥ), vyadhA ‘to pierce, hurt’, vaśA ‘to shine’, vyacA ‘to deceive’, OvraścŪ ‘to cut’, pracchA ‘to ask’ and bhrasjA ‘to roast’ undergo samprasāraṇa when an affix marked with K and Ṅ follows.

Note that both v and y can potentially undergo samprasāraṇa by 6.1.16. If we apply 6.1.16 to v at this step, 6.1.16 will be applicable to y at the following step. But if we apply 6.1.16 to y at this step, then by 6.1.37 na samprasāraṇe samprasāraṇam, 6.1.16 will not be applicable to v at the following step. This is a case of unidirectional blocking and thus of DOI conflict.

By my interpretation of 1.4.2, we apply the RHS rule 6.1.16 to y and get viadh + tvā. Thereafter, the derivation proceeds as follows: vidh + tvā (6.1.108 samprasāraṇāc ca) 🡪 vidhdhvā (8.2.40 jhaṣas tathor dho’dhaḥ) 🡪 viddhvā (8.4.53 jhalāṁ jaś jhaśi), which is the correct form.

159

I have included the kr̥danta derivation sad + KvasU + Ṅas in the previous chapter because there, nominal inflection plays a crucial role in helping us obtain the correct form. ↩︎
Guṇa replaces the final sound iK (i, u, r̥, l̥) of a verbal base when a sārvadhātuka or ārdhadhātuka affix follows. ↩︎