संस्कृते विश्वासटिप्पन्यः

TODO: footnote and other formatting

Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā A Prātiśākhya of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda With the commentaries Caturādhyāyībhāṣya, Bhārgava- Bhāskara-Vr̥tti and Pañcasandhi Critically edited, translated & annotated by Madhav M. Deshpande 1997

Dedicated with affection to my loving twin daughters Manjushree & Madhushree

Preface In her Foreword to Tatyana Elizarenkova’s fascinating work Language and Style of the Vedic R̥ṣis (SUNY Press, 1993), Wendy Doniger makes an interesting distinction between “the modern, trendy, obscure” disciplines such as semiotics, and “the ancient, dusty, arcane discipline of Vedic philology.” By this yardstick, the present work proudly fits within the latter type. This work simultaneously continues and criticizes the work of the great American Sanskritist, W.D. Whitney, who published the first edition of this text with the title Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya in 1862, and Surya Kanta, who produced the magnificent edition of a different Atharva-Prātiśākhya in 1939. It is the result of my own research that spans more than two decades. During this period, many trendy varieties of linguistics came to pass. Fortunately perhaps, I have been more interested in the history of both modern and ancient linguistic theory, than in becoming an ardent follower of any one of the transient theories. I have used my knowledge of modern phonetics and phonology to elucidate the ancient theories of the Prātiśākhyas so that they can be made comprehensible to a modern reader. However, my approach has been primarily textual and historical, rather than theoretical. It was in 1974 while reading the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā with my student James Bare at the University of Michigan that I detected a number of faulty readings and made a note of possible emendations. That very same year, during a visit to Pune in search of manuscripts, I found half a dozen manuscripts of this text at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and the Vaidika Samshodhana Mandala. To my delight, these manuscripts supported many of my emendations to Whitney’s text. This led me to think about preparing a critical edition of this text. The critical edition, however, could not be properly undertaken without gaining access to many more manuscripts of this text which were known to exist in different libraries around the world. In the year 1979, several more manuscripts became available to me. These came from the Staatsbibliothek Prussischer Kulturbesitz of Berlin, the library of the University of TÜbingen, the Asiatic Society of Calcutta, and the Scindia Oriental Institute of Ujjain. In 1980, I found a manuscript in Banaras at the home of an Atharvaveda reciter, Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate. Twelve years later, several important manuscripts were obtained in 1992 from the

library of the Sampurnananda Sanskrit University in Banaras. In the summer of 1995, I found three rare manuscripts of the Kramapāṭha and the Jaṭāpāṭha of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, which significantly assisted my interpretation of this text. In the midst of my other research, my work on this project continued on and off from 1974. I thank all the institutions that supported my research during this long period: 1974, U.S. Department of Education, through the Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan. 1976, Rackham Graduate School Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1979-80, Rackham Graduate School Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1990, College of Literature, Science, and the Arts, Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1992-93, American Institute of Indian Studies, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Office of the Vice- President for Research, the University of Michigan. Numerous people have helped me throughout this long period in many different ways. I would like to specifically thank the following individuals who helped me in acquiring manuscripts: Dr. Dieter George and Dr. Hartmut-Ortwin Feistel, Staatsbibliothek Prussischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin. Dr. N.B. Marathe of the Central Reference Library, Calcutta, (currently at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune). Dr. Amalendu De, the Asiatic Society, Calcutta. Dr. K. Gruessner, Library of the University of TÜbingen. Dr. V. Venkatachalam, Director, Scindia Oriental Institute, Ujjain. Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate, Durga Ghat, Banaras. Dr. B.N. Misra, Librarian, Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, Banaras. Dr. T.N. Dharmadhikari, Vaidika Samshodhana Mandala, Pune. Dr. R.N. Dandekar, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune.

A major part of this work was carried out at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute during my various research visits, but most intensively during 1992-93, and the summer of 1995. Besides the excellent manuscript collection of this institute, my daily conversations with Dr. R.N. Dandekar, Dr. M.A. Mehendale, Dr. A.M. Ghatage, and Dr. G.B. Palsule were most exciting. Many knotty problems of this text and its interpretation were solved during our afternoon tea. I thank all these scholars, and especially Dr. Dandekar, who introduced me to the mysteries of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda at the University of Poona, when I was studying for my Master’s degree in Sanskrit in the years 1966-68. In the U.S., my most sincere thanks go to Professor George Cardona. In spite of his own heavy commitments, Cardona has gone through this entire work and made numerous suggestions for improvement. At home in Ann Arbor, my colleague Professor John C. Catford, Professor (Emeritus) of Phonetics, University of Michigan, took a keen interest in this work. He read my translations with great interest and made suggestions to make them comprehensible to non-Sanskritist linguists. Finally I wish to thank my wife Shubhangi and my daughters Madhushree and Manjushree who have tolerated my eccentricities while I was lost in deep communication with my manuscripts and my computer. I dedicate this work to my two lovely daughters, Madhushree and Manjushree, who have brought immense joy to me and my wife. The book is typeset using Nagari and Roman diacritics fonts which I developed over the past several years. These fonts are named after my daughters. The Nagari font is titled Madhushree and the Roman diacritics font is titled Manjushree. During the long time it has taken to finish this project, I have learned a great deal about the history of the grammatical traditions in ancient India, and I hope that this book will spur further interest in this ‘ancient, dusty, and arcane,’ but highly important, branch of Vedic philology. While much of this work criticizes the views of Whitney and Surya Kanta, I wish to express my great indebtedness to these two predecessors. The more I read and analyzed their contributions, the more respect I have developed for their wisdom and industry. October 24, 1995Madhav M. Deshpande Ann Arbor, Michigan

Contents Preface Introduction

Critical Edition of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā1-4
Description of the Manuscripts4-9
New Features of the Critical Edition of the CA9-31
General Features of the Ancient Indian Phonetics31-47
Phonetics vs Phonology in Indian Grammatical Tradition47-59
Pāṇinian Impact on the Tradition of the CA59-80
The AV Prātiśākhyas and the ŚAV Text-Transmission80-95 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyika Adhyāya 1, Pāda 197-166 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 2167-200 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 3201-240 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 4241-262 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 1263-304 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 2305-325 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 3326-347 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 4348-373 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 1374-393 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 2394-421 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 3422-450 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 4451-477 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 1478-545 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 2546-571 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 3572-606 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 4607-630 Pañcasandhi of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa631-687

Bibliography & Abbreviations689-705 Sūtra Index707-728 Index of Sanskrit Terms729-775 Index of Texts and Authors777-815

-i- Preface In her Foreword to Tatyana Elizarenkova’s fascinating work Language and Style of the Vedic R̥ṣis (SUNY Press, 1993), Wendy Doniger makes an interesting distinction between “the modern, trendy, obscure” disciplines such as semiotics, and “the ancient, dusty, arcane discipline of Vedic philology.” By this yardstick, the present work proudly fits within the latter type. This work simultaneously continues and criticizes the work of the great American Sanskritist, W.D. Whitney, who published the first edition of this text with the title Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya in 1862, and Surya Kanta, who produced the magnificent edition of a different Atharva-Prātiśākhya in 1939. It is the result of my own research that spans more than two decades. During this period, many trendy varieties of linguistics came to pass. Fortunately perhaps, I have been more interested in the history of both modern and ancient linguistic theory, than in becoming an ardent follower of any one of the transient theories. I have used my knowledge of modern phonetics and phonology to elucidate the ancient theories of the Prātiśākhyas so that they can be made comprehensible to a modern reader. However, here my approach has been primarily textual and historical, rather than theoretical. It was in 1974 while reading the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā with my student James Bare at the University of Michigan that I detected a number of faulty readings and made a note of possible emendations. That very same year, during a visit to Pune in search of manuscripts, I found half a dozen manuscripts of this text at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and the Vaidika Samshodhana Mandala. To my delight, these manuscripts supported many of my emendations to Whitney’s text. This led me to think about preparing a critical edition of this text. The critical edition, however, could not be properly undertaken without gaining access to many more manuscripts of this text which were known to exist in different libraries around the world. In the year 1979, several more manuscripts became available to me. These came from the Staatsbibliothek Prussischer Kulturbesitz of Berlin, the library of the University of TÜbingen, the Asiatic Society of Calcutta, and the Scindia Oriental Institute of Ujjain. In 1980, I found a manuscript in Banaras at the home of an Atharvaveda reciter, Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate. Twelve years later, several important manuscripts were obtained in 1992 from the library of the Sampurnananda

-ii- Sanskrit University in Banaras. In the summer of 1995, I found three rare manuscripts of the Kramapāṭha and the Jaṭāpāṭha of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, which significantly assisted my interpretation of this text. In the midst of my other research, my work on this project continued on and off from 1974. I thank all the institutions that supported my research during this long period: 1974, U.S. Department of Education, through the Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan. 1976, Rackham Graduate School Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1979-80, Rackham Graduate School Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1990, College of Literature, Science, and the Arts, Faculty Research Grant, University of Michigan. 1992-93, American Institute of Indian Studies, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Office of the Vice- President for Research, the University of Michigan. Numerous people have helped me throughout this long period in many different ways. I would like to specifically thank the following individuals who helped me in acquiring manuscripts: Dr. Dieter George and Dr. Hartmut-Ortwin Feistel, Staatsbibliothek Prussischer Kulturbesitz in Berlin. Dr. N.B. Marathe of the Central Reference Library, Calcutta, (currently at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune). Dr. Amalendu De, the Asiatic Society, Calcutta. Dr. K. Gruessner, Library of the University of TÜbingen. Dr. V. Venkatachalam, Director, Scindia Oriental Institute, Ujjain. Pandit Narayan Shastri Ratate, Durga Ghat, Banaras. Dr. B.N. Misra, Librarian, Sampurnananda Sanskrit University, Banaras. Dr. T.N. Dharmadhikari, Vaidika Samshodhana Mandala, Pune. Dr. R.N. Dandekar, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune.

-iii- A major part of this work was carried out at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute during my various research visits, but most intensively during 1992-93, and the summer of 1995. Besides the excellent manuscript collection of this institute, my daily conversations with Dr. R.N. Dandekar, Dr. M.A. Mehendale, Dr. A.M. Ghatage, and Dr. G.B. Palsule were most exciting. Many knotty problems of this text and its interpretation were solved during our afternoon tea. I thank all these scholars, and especially Dr. Dandekar, who introduced me to the mysteries of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda at the University of Poona, when I was studying for my Master’s degree in Sanskrit in the years 1966-68. In the U.S., my most sincere thanks go to Professor George Cardona. In spite of his own heavy commitments, Cardona has gone through this entire work and made numerous suggestions for improvement. At home in Ann Arbor, my colleague Professor John C. Catford, Professor (Emeritus) of Phonetics, University of Michigan, took a keen interest in this work. He read my translations with great interest and made suggestions to make them comprehensible to non-Sanskritist linguists. I must also thank Professor Michael Witzel, the editor of the series, for making numerous helpful suggestions. Finally I wish to thank my wife Shubhangi and my daughters Madhushree and Manjushree who have tolerated my eccentricities while I was lost in deep communication with my manuscripts and my computer. I dedicate this work to my two lovely daughters, Madhushree and Manjushree, who have brought immense joy to me and my wife. The book is typeset using Nagari and Roman diacritics fonts which I developed over the past several years. These fonts are named after my daughters. The Nagari font is titled Madhushree and the Roman diacritics font is titled Manjushree. During the long time it has taken to finish this project, I have learned a great deal about the history of the grammatical traditions in ancient India, and I hope that this book will spur further interest in this ‘ancient, dusty, and arcane,’ but highly important, branch of Vedic philology. While much of this work criticizes the views of Whitney and Surya Kanta, I wish to express my great indebtedness to these two predecessors. The more I read and analyzed their contributions, the more respect I have developed for their wisdom and industry. October 24, 1995Madhav M. Deshpande Ann Arbor, Michigan

-iv-

-v- Contents Preface Introduction

Critical Edition of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā1-4
Description of the Manuscripts4-9
New Features of the Critical Edition of the CA9-31
General Features of the Ancient Indian Phonetics31-47
Phonetics vs Phonology in Indian Grammatical Tradition47-59
Pāṇinian Impact on the Tradition of the CA59-80
The AV Prātiśākhyas and the ŚAV Text-Transmission80-95 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyika Adhyāya 1, Pāda 197-166 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 2167-200 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 3201-240 Adhyāya 1, Pāda 4241-262 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 1263-304 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 2305-325 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 3326-347 Adhyāya 2, Pāda 4348-373 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 1374-393 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 2394-421 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 3422-450 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 4451-477 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 1478-545 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 2546-571 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 3572-606 Adhyāya 4, Pāda 4607-630

-vi- Pañcasandhi of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa 631-687 Bibliography & Abbreviations689-705 Sūtra Index707-728 Index of Sanskrit Terms729-775 Index of Texts and Authors 777-815

INTRODUCTION

Critical Edition of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā 1.1. William Dwight Whitney, the great American Sanskritist, pub- lished the first edition of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā in the journal of the American Oriental Society in 1862. This edition was based exclusively on a single manuscript of this text which Whitney found in Berlin. Whitney fully realized that this manuscript (= Chambers 143) was in bad shape, and attempted to find more manuscripts in European and Indian libraries. Having failed in his search for more manuscripts, and having realized the importance of this text for the study of the Śaunakīya-Atharvaveda, which he and Roth had edited and published from Berlin in 1856, Whitney decided to edit and publish this text. In the introduction to his edition, Whitney makes the following comments about his lone manuscript source (Whitney 1862: iv): Most unfortunately, considering the extreme rarity of the work, the manuscript is a very poor one. Not only is it everywhere excessively incorrect, often beyond the possibility of successful emendation; it is also defective, exhibiting lacunae at several points. Some may be of opinion, then, that the publication of the Prātiśākhya upon its authority alone is premature, and should not have been undertaken. Emphasizing the “faintness of the hope that additional manuscripts would later be obtainable” (Whitney 1862: iv) and “the peculiar interest of this class of works,” (ibid.) Whitney published his excellent edition in 1862, with a translation and notes based on the commentary in the Berlin manuscript. From this lone poor manuscript, Whitney could only salvage the text of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. He extensively used and cited the commentary in that manuscript, though due to the poor condition of the manuscript, he did not publish the complete text of this commentary. Considering the odds against Whitney, one must admit that he produced a masterly edition which has been widely used by scholars since its publication. 1.2. The Berlin manuscript did not call the text by the title Atharva- veda Prātiśākhya. However, Whitney argued (1862: iii):

2 INTRODUCTION The treatise was first brought to light, and its character deter- mined, by Roth. It was recognized by him as being what is indicated by our title, a Prātiśākhya to a text of the Atharvaveda. That it has any inherent right to be called the Prātiśākhya to the Atharvaveda is not, of course, claimed for it; but, considering the extreme improbability that any other like phonetic treatise, belonging to any other schools of that Veda, will ever be brought to light, the title of Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya finds a sufficient justification in its convenience, and in its analogy with the names given to the other kindred treatises by their respective editors. Whitney’s text has been widely used under the name of the Atharva- veda-Prātiśākhya. The above paragraph from Whitney needs to be read care- fully, and one should note that he nowhere asserted that this text is the Prātiśākhya of the Atharva-Veda, an accusation hurled at him unjustly by Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 31): “Whitney turns an APr into the APr.” Whitney never made such a claim. Whitney’s modest claim that the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā belongs to the class of Prātiśākhyas was indeed not outlandish. Support for the same conclusion comes from an important source. Uvaṭa in his introductory comments on the RPR quotes CA (1.1.2-3: एवमिहेति च, विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये) and introduces it as (M.D. Shastri’s edition, Vol. II, p. 23): तथा चाथर्वणप्रातिशाख्ये ‘so it is said in the Prātiśākhya of the Atharvaveda.’ The second likely tradi- tional source of information is the commentary Chāyā by Vaidyanātha Pāya- guṇḍe on Nāgeśabhaṭṭa’s Uddyota. In his MB on P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ), Patañjali quotes a sequence of rules from some text, and they look very similar to CA (1.1.29-32). Ramadeva Tripathi (1977: 141) ascribes to Pāyaguṇḍe’s Chāyā a remark that these rules are cited from the Śaunaka Prātiśākhya. I have not been able to trace this remark to citations of Chāyā in the Nirnaya Sagara edition of the MB. However, I find a remark स्पृष्टमित्यादीनि चत्वारि शौनकप्रातिशाख्यसूत्राणि बोध्यानि, Nirnaya Sagara Edition of the MB, Vol.I., Bombay, 1917, edited by Pt. Shivadatta Kuddala, p. 228. This comment is followed by the abbreviation dā. This abbreviation indicates that the comment belongs to the editor, rather than to Vaidyanātha’s Chāyā. It is possible that the learned editor was familiar with Whitney’s edition of the CA, which called it the Atharva-Veda- Prātiśākhya. In any case, one can at least say that a traditional Pandit did not see anything wrong in calling this text a Śaunaka Prātiśākhya.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 3 This is also supported by the Ātharvaṇa-Pariśiṣṭa (= Atharva-Vidhāna) included in the Śikṣāsaṃgraha (p. 479). It refers to a Śaunakīya-Prātiśākhya and to the Māṇḍūkī-Śikṣā : प्रातिशाख्यं शौनकीयं स्वरवर्णविभागजम् ॥ ५cd ॥ शिक्षा प्रकल्पिता सम्यङ्मण्डूकेन महर्षिणा । शिष्याणामुपदेशार्थं सम्यगुच्चारणाय वै ॥ ६ ॥ From the description of the Śaunakīya-Prātiśākhya as svara-varṇa- vibhāgajam, one can be certain that the Pariśiṣṭa is referring to the CA. 1.3. The subsequent scholarship on the Atharvaveda has happily dis- proved Whitney’s earlier bleak expectations. In 1880, Whitney himself pub- lished “Collation of the Second Manuscript of the Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya” in the tenth volume of the Journal of the American Oriental Society. Albrecht Weber was instrumental in drawing Whitney’s attention to this manuscript which was purchased by Georg BÜhler for the Government of Bombay. This second manuscript collated by Whitney is now deposited at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (# 11/1870-71). Whitney duly notes that this second manuscript gives the title of the work simply as Caturādhyāyikā throughout. It also calls itself Caturādhyāyī-Vyākaraṇa in some places. Whitney, however, still insists on calling this text Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya. 1.4. In 1923, Vishva Bandhu Shastri published a different treatise from Lahore under the name Atharva-Prātiśākhya. This edition is based on six different manuscripts. Referring to Whitney’s earlier statements, Vishva Bandhu Shastri pointed out that many new manuscripts of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā had also been found and preserved and that “a new and revised edition of the Caturādhyāyikā has thus become a matter of necessity” (Atharva- Prātiśākhya, edited by V. B. Shastri, p. 12). However, Vishva Bandhu Shastri seems to have been unaware of Whitney’s collation of the second manuscript, and he did not undertake the task of preparing this new revised edition of the Caturādhyāyikā. In 1937, Surya Kanta Shastri prepared a critical edition of this other Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya for his Ph.D. at Oxford, and this text has been pub- lished from Lahore in 1939. This text includes Vishva Bandhu’s text as one of the versions, and is obviously different from the Caturādhyāyikā. In fact, several manuscripts which contain this Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya also contain the text of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. Thus, the labors of Vishva Bandhu Shastri and Surya Kanta Shastri have conclusively proved the existence of two separate texts, i.e. the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā and Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya,

4 INTRODUCTION and that the text that Whitney then called the Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya must now be called simply the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. 1.5. The existence of other manuscripts of Caturādhyāyikā became known to the world of scholarship since Weber noticed in 1863 a second manuscript in the Literarisches Central-Blatt (No. 29). This was just one year after Whitney published his edition. Later, more manuscripts of the Caturādhyāyikā were noticed by Vishva Bandhu Shastri and Surya Kanta Shastri. Additionally, in 1937, the curator of the Scindia Oriental Institute, Ujjain, Sadashiv L. Katre, discovered a manuscript titled Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa, which is identical with the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. He published a detailed notice of this manuscript and its comparison with Whitney’s text (Katre 1938- 39). However, Katre does not show any awareness of the existence of the other manuscripts of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā which were noticed by Vishva Bandhu Shastri and Surya Kanta Shastri. I have myself been interested in this text for many years and have lo- cated several new manuscripts of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. The library of the Vaidika Saṃsodhana Maṇḍaḷa, Pune, has three manuscripts of this text, two of which bear the title Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa. These two manuscripts also contain commentaries on this text by Bhārgava Bhāskara and Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, and in an article published in 1976, I have discussed some points connected with these manuscripts. In the course of my personal search for more manuscripts of this text at Banaras in December 1979, I located a manuscript of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā with a Maharashtrian Brahmin reciter of the Atharvaveda, Shri Narayan Shastri Ratate, and with his kind permission was able to obtain a Xerox copy of the same. A further significant discovery is that of a manuscript at the Asiatic Society, Calcutta, which contains the same commentary as in the Berlin manuscript used by Whitney, and that this manuscript, though incomplete, is in a much better shape. This is a great help in editing the text of this commentary. 2. Description of the Manuscripts 2.1. Below, I shall briefly describe all the manuscripts which are utilized in the preparation of this critical edition: A.Caturādhyāyikā. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. No. 1/1873-74. Devanagari. Complete. Folios: 12-21, 10" x 5 1/2". From Bikaner. ± 1700 A.D. The entire manuscript contains Pañcapaṭalikā, Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, Kālātītaprāyaścitta, Caturādhyāyikā and Atharvaprāti- śākhya. There is no information about who copied this manuscript, when and

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 5 where, because there is no usual elaborate colophon at the end of the bundle. Since the manuscript ends with the second Prapāṭhaka of the Atharva- Prātiśākhya, most likely there are several missing folios. B.Caturādhyāyikā. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. No. 179/ 1880-81, 408. Devanagari. Complete. Folios: 56-66, 9 1/2" x 4". From Anahilapurapattana (= Patan in Gujarat). The date given is Saṃvat 1717 (= 1659 A.D.) and the colophon provides a precise day: संवत् १७१७ वर्षे भाद्रपदमासे कृष्णपक्षे ११ रविवासरे अद्ये श्रीअनहलपुरपत्तनमध्ये वास्तव्यं आभ्य- न्तरनागरज्ञातीयपञ्चोलीसोमजीसुतबृहस्पतिजीपठनार्थम्. The entire manuscript contains Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, Jyotiṣam, Mahāśāntiḥ, Pañcapaṭalikā, Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, Kālātītaprāyaścitta, Caturādhyāyikā, Atharvaprātiśākhya, and Chandaściti. The manuscript makes irregular use of the Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās and the Avagraha. The manuscript comes from the Pañcoli family of Patan. The first 27 folios are in a different hand and are utterly damaged, which perhaps indicates a different age for the two parts of the manuscripts. C.Caturādhyāyikā. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. No. 2/1884-86. Devanagari. Incomplete. Folios: 1-8, Folios 4a and 5b are missing. Also missing is the first page of the text. 9 3/8" x 4 1/4". From Anahilapurapattana. ± 1700 A.D. The colophon says: पञ्चुलीईश्वरसुत- नीलकण्ठपठनार्थम्. It comes from the Pañcoli family from Patan. This manu- script is closely related to P below. See information on P below. D.Caturādhyāyikā. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. Nos: 178(vii)/ 1880-81 and 87/1880-81, #405 and #407. Folios were scattered in these two bundles, and I have now put them together and they are kept in the bundle 178(vii)/1880-81. The second bundle now contains only the text of the Kauśikagr̥hyasūtra. Devanagari. Incomplete. Folios 58-69, Folio 63b missing, 10 1/2" x 4 3/4". From Anahilapurapattana. 1695 A.D. The manuscript contains the following texts: Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, Jyotiṣa, Mahāśānti, Pañcapaṭalikā, Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, Kālātītaprāyaścitta, Caturādhyāyikā, Atharva- prātiśākhya, and Chandaściti. It shows occasional use of the Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. This manuscript is also related to Roth’s Bikaner manuscript (transcript at TÜbingen). The colophon reads: संवत् १७५३ वर्षे चैत्रशुदि २ रवौ अद्य श्रीअनहील- पुरपत्तने वास्तव्यं आभ्यन्तरज्ञातीयतुलापुरश(?)ब्रह्माण्डमहीमहादानादिअतिरुद्रकर्ताहिताग्नी- पञ्चकृत्वचातुर्मास्ययाजित्रिपाठिश्रीअनन्तजीसुतव्रजभूशणेन श्रीसाम्बसदाशिवार्पणबुद्ध्या लिखा- पितमिदं परोपकाराय. E. Caturādhyāyikā. Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. No. 11/1870-71, #403. Devanagari. Complete. Folios: 1-13, 8 1/2" x 4 1/8". From Kaṇvālaya in Gujarat. 1660 A.D. Colophon: संवत् १७१८ कार्तिकशुदि ११ बुध. This manuscript is written by: पञ्चोलीनागजित्सूनुना कण्वालयनिवासिना

6 INTRODUCTION भवदेवेन इदं ग्रन्थं लिखितम्. This manuscript makes occasional use of the Avagraha, but does not use Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. Importantly, it lists 180 as the measure of the text (granthasaṃkhyā). It was this manuscript which was transcribed for Whitney who published the “Collation of the Second Manu- script of the Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya" (1880). The cover page of the manu- script calls it Caturādhyāyikāvyākaraṇam and as a matter of fact it is closely related with mss. F which also calls itself Caturādhyāyī-Vyākaraṇa. F.Caturādhyāyī-Vyākaraṇa. Gore collection, Vaidika Saṃśo- dhana Maṇḍaḷa, Pune. No. 4177. Devanagari. Complete. Folios 1-12, 9 1/2" x 4 1/2". From Mahuli near Satara. 1819 A.D. The colophon says that the manuscript was copied by a certain Raghunāthātmajamārtaṇḍabhaṭṭa. The date is specified as: शके १७४३ वृषानामाब्दे संवत् १८७७ नन्दननामाब्दे दक्षिणायने हेमर्तौ मार्गशीर्षशुक्लद्वितीया. It also mentions 180 as the measure of the work (granthasaṃkhyā, 180x32 = number of syllables?). The manuscript came from the Gore family, originally belonging to Mahuli near Satara. This family was in charge of the Atharvavedic priestcraft for the king of Satara. Later the family moved to Sangli. The manuscript occasionally uses the Avagraha, but does not use Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. G.Kautsavyākaraṇasya Caturādhyāyātmakasya Bhārgavabhāskarī- yavr̥ttiḥ. Gore collection, Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa, Pune. No. 4178. Devanagari. Incomplete. Folios: 1-24, 7.9" x 4.2". From Sangli, Maha- rashtra. ± 1700 A.D. This manuscript contains a commentary by Bhārgava Bhāskara. An important feature of this manuscript is that in contrast with all other manuscripts it gives three numbers for each rule, i.e. numbers for the Adhyāya, Pāda, and Sūtra. It occasionally uses the Avagraha, but does not make use of the Pr̥ṣṭhamātrā. In its incomplete state, it covers rules 1.1.10 to 1.4.8, or Whitney 1.8 to 1.99. H.Caturādhyāyī-Bhāṣya. Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kultur- besitz, Berlin. Chambers 143. Complete. Folios: 1-77, 8 1/4 " x 3 3/4". From North India. Saṃvat 1714 (= 1656 A.D.) This is the manuscript used by Whitney for his edition. In this manuscript of the commentary, there is a general pattern as follows. First a Sūtra is stated. Then it is explained and analyzed in the commentary. Then the Sūtra is again repeated at the end of the commentary. These three readings of the Sūtra are respectively labeled Ha, Hc, and Hb. I.Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa. Oriental Institute, Ujjain. No. 3576. De- vanāgarī. Complete. Folios: 1-12. 11 1/4" x 6". Belonged to Bāḷaśāstrī Garde from Gwalior. ± 1700 A.D. A detailed notice of this manuscript was published by S.L. Katre (1938-39) who informs us that “a few years ago,

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 7 however, a considerable portion of his collection was actually emersed into a well by the last surviving lady of this line, possibly in a fit of despair, but, thanks to the timely intervention of some authorities of Gwalior State, the remnant could be rescued and deposited at the Oriental Manuscript Library of Ujjain maintained by the state.” J.Caturādhyāyikā. Personal property of Late Pt. Narayan Shastri Ratate, Durga Ghat, Banaras. Devanagari. Complete. Folios: 1-5, 11" x 5". From Banaras. ± 1700 A.D. The colophon says: श्रीमती गङ्गादेवी वरदा भवतु. I have a Xerox copy of this manuscript in my personal collection. K.Kautsavyākaraṇe Pañcasandhiḥ. With a commentary by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa. Gore collection, Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa, Pune. No. 4179. Devanagari. Incomplete. Folios: 1-36, 7 4/5" x 4 1/5". 1862 A.D. This manuscript was copied by Ātmārām Tivāḍi in: संवत् १९२०, शक १७८५ कार्तिकमासे शुक्लपक्षे तिथौ पञ्चम्यां रविवासरे. It occasionally uses the Avagraha, but does not use Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. L.Caturādhyāyikā. Universitätsbibliothek, TÜbingen, Germany. An incomplete transcript of a Bikaner manuscript made by Roth. The original could not be traced. The original manuscript contained the following texts: Prāyaścitta, Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, Jyotiṣa, Mahāśānti, Pañcapaṭalikā, Dan- tyoṣṭhyavidhi, Kālātītaprāyaścitta, Caturādhyāyikā, Prātiśākhyamūla-sūtra, Chandaściti, and Nivitpraiṣādhyāyapuroruk. This manuscript generally belongs together with the manuscripts B and D which come from Patan in Gujarat. M.Caturādhyāyī. Asiatic Society, Calcutta. No. 7852. Devana- gari. Complete. Folios: 35b-43b, 4 1/4" x 9 1/2". Unknown origin. 1613 A.D. The date is specified as संवत् १६७१ वर्षे ज्येष्ठवदि ११. This manuscript uses occasional Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās and the Avagraha. The manuscript also contains the text of the Atharva-Prātiśākhya. N.Caturadhyāyī-Bhāṣya. Asiatic Society, Calcutta. No. 1272. Devanagari. Incomplete. Folios: 1-61a, 63b-64a, 101. 8 3/4" x 4 1/4". Un- known origin. 1624 A.D. The colophon reads: संवत् १६८२ वर्षे पुरुषोत्तममासे कृष्णपक्षे त्रयोदशीमन्दवासरे लिखितमिदम्. This commentary is identical with the commentary found in the manuscript H from Berlin used by Whitney. Like the manuscript H, N also repeats each Sūtra three times, and these three readings are labeled Na, Nc, and Nb, respectively. O.Kautsavyākaraṇe Caturādhyāyikā. Sarasvati Bhavana Library, Sampurnananda Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya, Banaras. No. 2086. Devanagari. Complete. Folios 1-10. 8 3/4" x 4". No indication of place or date in the colophon. Approximately a hundred and fifty years old. Does not make use

8 INTRODUCTION of Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. The first and the last folios have a stamp in English showing that the last owner was Mr. S.B. Vaidya of Durgaghat, Banaras, an Atharvavedin Brahmin. P.Caturādhyāyī. Sarasvati Bhavana Library, Sampurnanda San- skrit Vishvavidyalaya. Banaras. No. 2074. Devanagari. Complete. 10 1/4" x 4 1/5". Folios 1-27. Caturādhyāyikā extends from folio 19 to 25. The ms. contains Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, Jyotiṣam, Chandaściti, Pañcapaṭalikā, Dantyo- ṣṭhyavidhi, Kāltītaprāyaścittam, Caturādhyāyikā, and Atharva-Prātiśākhya. It is a relatively old ms., and it makes occasional use of Pr̥ṣṭhamātrās. On folio 13, it gives the date of copying as संवत् १६८५ वर्षे मागशरवदि ५ गुरौ लिखितम्. However, on folio 27, at the end of the manu-script, a different hand adds संवत् १६३४ वर्षे आश्वनशुदि १५ दिने पंचोलि श्री इश्वर लक्षणग्रंथ भणे छे पंचोलि श्री गोविन्दजी कनेर (?) भणे छे. It looks like the ms. belonged to the Pañcolī family of Gujarat. The original ms. probably goes back to Saṃvat 1685, and that it was supplemented and corrected by another hand in Saṃvat 1734. The same person, Śrī Īśvara Pañcolī, is referred to in the ms. C above, and both the manuscripts probably belong to the same family. It is clear that the same hand has added corrections to both of these manuscripts. 2.2. I propose the following genealogy for these manuscripts. L A B D P M J H N C E F O I G K CA-Vyākaraṇa Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa Ur Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā X Y

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 9 2.3. Taking into account the significant shared errors and other shared deviant features, the following groups of manuscripts seem to have strong relationships. The number given in the bracket stands for the shared errors and other shared deviant features noted in this edition: A-B-D (47), A-B (44), A- B-D-M-J (16), A-B-D-M (11), A-B-D-J (4), A-B-L (4), B-D (21), C-E-F (6), C-E-F-I (5), C-H-N (4), E-F (27), E-F-H (4), E-F-I (28), F-I (4), H-N (42). It is not necessary to record information about groups of manuscripts which share one or two errors. The above chart takes into account this information. Some of these relationships are particularly complex. For example, consider the relationship between A, B, and D. All three share 47 common deviations, and hence must go back to a common source. However, A and B share 44 common deviations which are different from the 21 common deviations shared by B and D. This must mean that the source of A and B must be slightly different from the source of B and D. In my opinion, the only way to resolve this situation is to suggest that the manuscript B used multiple sources. One of its sources was shared in common with A. However, another source for B was shared in common with D. The manuscripts O and P became available to me after all other manuscripts were already collated and the basic relationships were determined. I have shown their appropriate relationships in the diagram above, though I have not given counts of shared deviant features. This stemma should be viewed only as a convenient grouping of the manuscript material. One must keep in mind the possibility and the proba- bility that the persons copying and correcting the manuscripts used various sources, and this accounts for the erratic readings, which violate the otherwise plausible linkages between the manuscripts. Thus, while the manuscripts B, C, D, and P, all derive from Anahilapurapattana (= Patan in Gujarat), the manuscript C seems to share closer links with the manuscript E from Kaṇvālaya in Gujarat and F from Maharashtra. One may also note that the mss. C, E, and F contain only the text of the CA, while the mss. in the X group contain other texts besides the CA, and they usually contain the same set of texts. As a general observation, it is interesting to note all the manuscripts seem to derive from the Western regions ranging from Rajasthan to Maharashtra, and that the regions of Southern and Eastern India are not represented in these available manuscripts. 3. New Features of the Critical Edition 3.1. Here I shall briefly indicate some of the important gains which are already evident from the manuscript material now available to us. Whitney

10 INTRODUCTION had divided his text only into four Adhyāyas. He knew that each Adhyāya had four Pādas, but his manuscript was not clear on these divisions. Hence, he could not subdivide each Adhyāya into Pādas. The manuscript material now available settles this issue once and for all. Below I have given the colophons occurring at the end of the first Pāda of the first Adhyāya as found in the various manuscripts. A, B, M, Pप्रथमः पादः । Cइति चतुराध्यायिकायां प्रथमस्याध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । Dइति प्रथमः पादः । E, Fप्रथमस्य प्रथमः पादः । Gइत्यथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणे प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमपादस्य भार्गवभास्करीयवृत्तिः परिपूर्णा । H, Nचतुराध्यायिकायां प्रथमस्याध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । सूत्र ४१ । एकचत्वाशिंत् । I४१ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे प्रथमस्याध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । Jइति प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । O१ ॥ ४१ ॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ Since all of these colophons occur at the same juncture, we can now be completely certain where the Pādas end, and we can now subdivide the text properly. 3.2. Several prose and metrical passages found in the Berlin manu- script were relegated by Whitney to the commentary. He did not consider them to be part of the text of the CA. Several of these passages are found in almost all the manuscripts which give only the text of the Sūtras of the CA. This helps us assign these passages to the text of the CA, rather than to the text of the commentary. For instance, Whitney (1.105) reads as follows: खण्वखा३ इ खैमखा इ मध्ये तदुरि । इदं भूया३ इदा३मिति । ऊर्ध्वो नु सृष्टा३स्तिर्यङ्नु सृष्टा३ः सर्वा दिशः पुरुष आ बभूवाँ३ । पराञ्चमोदनं प्राशीः प्रत्यञ्चामिति । त्वमोदनं प्राशीस्त्वामोदना३ इति । वशेया३मवशे- ति। यत्तदासी३दिदं नु ता३दिति। इति प्लुतानि । Whitney includes this long passage in the Berlin manuscript in the text of the Caturādhyāyikā, but stops abruptly, while the passage actually continues further in that manuscript:

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 11 किमर्थः परिपाठः । इत उत्तरम् अधिकम् । एतावत् स्वार्थोऽपि । बहुविधा- स्त्रिविधाः प्लुतयो भवन्ति । स्वरपरा अभिनिष्ठानपरा व्यञ्जनपरास्तासां याः समानाक्षरपरास्ता इतावप्लुतवद्भवन्ति । इतावप्लुतवद्भवन्ति । The entire passage with some minor variations is now supported by the manuscripts A, B, D, E, F, H, I, J, M, N, O and P and it is most certainly a part of the text of the CA. There are many such passages. On the other hand, many passages which are ascribed to the commentary by Whitney are not found in any of the manuscripts of the CA, and hence we know that they in- deed do not form a part of the CA. 3.3. The new manuscripts help us detect rules which are missing in Whitney’s edition and in the Berlin manuscript. For instance: After Whitney (3.28), the manuscripts A, B, D, E, F, I, J, M, N, O and P have the rules छकारश्च (or °स्य) and पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात्. After Whitney (3.80), the manuscripts A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, M, O and P have the rules नसश्च, धातुस्थादयकारात्, उरु, ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम् and निपातस्य (or °श्च) स्वः. After Whitney (3.86), the manuscripts A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, M, O and P have the rule नभेः. After Whitney (4.93), the manuscripts A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, M, O and P have the rule इंग्यवच्च. After Whitney (4.107), the manuscripts A, B, C, D, E, F, I, J, M, O and P have the rule संहितादार्ढ्यार्थम्. Many of these rules were noticed by Whitney himself in his “Collation of the Second Manuscript” in 1880, and were again noticed by S.L. Katre (1938-39: 384). Now with the help of the substantially increased manuscript evidence, we can be more certain about the text of these rules. 3.4. The manuscripts occasionally offer a different splitting of rules from what has been offered by Whitney. For instance, consider the three rules given by Whitney: Whitney (1.14):समानयमेऽक्षरमुच्चैरुदात्तम् । Whitney (1.15):नीचैरनुदात्तम् ।

12 INTRODUCTION Whitney (1.16):आक्षिप्तं स्वरितम् । Now, all the manuscripts we have give just one continuous rule as: समानयमेऽक्षरमुच्चैरुदात्तं नीचैरनुदात्तमाक्षिप्तं स्वरितम् । The manuscript G in fact provides a single number (i.e. 1.1.16) for this rule. 3.5. In some cases, the manuscripts help us discard some of Whit- ney’s emendations. Consider the following examples: Whitney (1.19): कण्ठ्यानाम् अधरकण्ठः. Against the reading of the Berlin manuscript, i.e. °kaṇṭhyaḥ, Whitney emended the text to °kaṇṭhaḥ. Now the Berlin manuscript stands supported by all manuscripts, except I which supports Whitney’s emendation. However, I believe it is most likely that this widely shared reading is an error going back to the archetype. Whitney (1.25): ओष्ठ्यानामधरौष्ठम्. This goes against the reading of the Berlin manuscript, i.e. °auṣṭhyam. The Berlin reading is supported by all manuscripts, except I which supports Whitney’s emendation. However, I believe it is most likely that this widely shared reading is an error going back to the archetype. Whitney (1.82): आर्त्नी इवादिष्विवादितिः परः. Berlin reads °ditiparaḥ. This is supported by all the manuscripts. 3.6. several cases, the manuscripts now available support Whit- ney’s expectations. Consider the following rules: Whitney (1.66): लकारस्य रेफः पादमंगुलिमित्येवमादीनाम्. Whitney says on this rule: “We should have expected here pādam- aṃgurim …” Whitney’s expectation is supported by all the available manuscripts, including a reading in the Berlin manu- script, i.e. H. Whitney (2.92): स्थासहिसिचीनामकारव्यवायेऽपि. The Berlin text is severely mutilated, and the above text is Whitney’s own con-

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 13 jecture, which is now fully supported by the manuscripts C, D, E, F, I, J, M, N, O and P. Whitney (3.29): [न] विसर्जनीयः. There is no support for na in the Berlin manuscript, and this is Whitney’s conjecture. It is now supported by the manuscripts A, B, D, E, F, I, J, M, N, O and P. 3.7. I hope I have sufficiently illustrated the new features of the present critical edition of the CA alias Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa, and the extent to which it replaces Whitney’s pioneering work. It is hoped that this critical edition of the CA will open up new dimensions for the study of the Atharva- veda and its ancillary literature. As indicated above, the new manuscript material leads to a wholly new numbering for the rules of the CA. Most of the manuscripts do not provide any numbering whatsoever. However, there are several manuscripts which do provide numbering of the rules in different ways. For instance, manuscript G provides a continuous numbering for all rules. It gives the number of the Adhyāya, the Pāda, and the Sūtra. Manu- script I provides numbering within each Pāda, mostly for rules 10, 20, etc. The mss. H and N provide cumulative numbers for the Pādas and Adhyāyas. The ms. O also provides, in its colophons, totals for the rules in each Pāda. The numbers provided in these different mss. do not always agree with each other, but tell us something about the different textual traditions, some of which included more material than others. Sometimes we find that a given tradition of transmission split a rule into two, or joined two rules into one. Such changes obviously affected the counting of rules in the text. Below, I have provided a complete numbering of the CA rules found in this edition, along with the corresponding numbers in Whitney’s edition, and the numbers found in different manuscripts: 3.8. This edition presents not only the revised text of the CA, but a fairly complete text of the commentary Caturādhyāyībhāṣya (= CAB) based on two manuscripts. It further offers partial texts of the commentaries Vr̥tti by Bhārgava-Bhāskara and a reworking of the CA rules with a commentary called Pañcasandhi by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, along the lines of Bhaṭtojī Dīkṣita’s Sidhānta- Kaumudī and Anubhūtisvarūpācārya’s Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa. Both of these commentaries are edited here on the basis of single manuscripts preserved at the Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa at Pune. The three commentaries are discussed in some detail later in this introduction in the context of the successive degrees of Pāṇinian influence. We know nothing about the authors

14 INTRODUCTION of these commentaries, beside their names. For the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya, we do not even know the name of its author. In general terms, one may say that the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya belongs to a period closer to the Kāśikāvr̥tti on Pāṇini, while the other two commentaries seem to follow Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita’s Siddhāntakaumudī. The Caturādhyāyībhāṣya is also very closely linked to the tradition as represented by the Atharva-Prātiśākhya edited by Surya Kanta. In several hundred cases, the CAB cites the first few examples from a long list of examples fully listed under the rules of the APR. In my notes on the CA, I have fully indicated this relationship. On the other hand, the commentaries of Bhārgava-Bhāskara and Kr̥ṣṇadāsa are completely unaware of the existence of the CAB or the APR, and explain the rules of the CA more on the basis of the parallel rules of Pāṇini. Even here, one notices that the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara shows full familiarity with the text of the Śaunakīya AV, while Kr̥ṣṇadāsa hardly ever cites examples from the AV. The Caturādhyāyī- bhāṣya is closely familiar with an ancient Śikṣā which is in part also contained in the AV Pariśiṣṭa called Varṇapaṭala, but is not familiar with either the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā or the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. In contrast with this, the latter two commentaries show no awareness of the ancient Śikṣā cited by the CAB. On the other hand, they show direct familiarity with the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā and the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. Thus, the present edition provides means to understand the changing nature of the CA tradition from a period going close to that of Pāṇini to a period coming close to that of Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita. During this long period, the text of the CA underwent successive interpretations at the hands of commentators who were gradually more and more influenced by the tradition of the Pāṇinian commentaries. It is hoped that more manuscripts of these commentaries will come to light in the future and a more complete account of this tradition can be eventually put together. However, I am delighted to present the available materials in this edition. I have been engaged in collecting and interpreting these materials almost since 1975 when I first noticed the manuscripts available in Pune at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute and at the Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷ. Now I have made use of almost every known manuscript (and also some not listed in Aithal 1991) in preparing this edition which marks a substantial advance over the edition prepared so valiantly by Whitney in 1862 on the basis of a single manuscript.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 15 3.9. The new numbering for the CA Adhyāya 1, Pāda 1 CAWhitneyMss. 1.1.1.missingG: 1.1.1. 1.1.2.1.1. 1.1.3.1.2. 1.1.4.1.2. 1.1.5.1.3. 1.1.6.1.4. 1.1.7.1.5. 1.1.8.1.6. 1.1.9.1.7. 1.1.10.1.8.G: 1.1.10.; I: 1.10. 1.1.11.1.9.G: 1.1.11. 1.1.12.1.10. 1.1.13.1.11.G: 1.1.13. 1.1.14.1.12.G: 1.1.14. 1.1.15.1.13.G: 1.1.15. 1.1.16.1.14-16.G: 1.1.16. 1.1.17.1.17.G: 1.1.17. 1.1.18.1.18.G: 1.1.18. 1.1.19.1.19.G: 1.1.19. 1.1.20.1.20.G: 1.1.20.; I: 1.20. 1.1.21.1.21.G: 1.1.21. 1.1.22.1.22.G: 1.1.22. 1.1.23.1.23.G: 1.1.23. 1.1.24.1.24.G: 1.1.24. 1.1.25.1.25.G: 1.1.25. 1.1.26.1.26.G: 1.1.26. 1.1.27.1.27.G: 1.1.27. 1.1.28.1.28.G: 1.1.28. 1.1.29.1.29.G: 1.1.29. 1.1.30.1.30.G: 1.1.30.; I: 1.30. 1.1.31.1.31.G: 1.1.31. 1.1.32.1.32.G: 1.1.32. 1.1.33.1.33.G: 1.1.33.

16 INTRODUCTION 1.1.34.1.34.G: 1.1.34. 1.1.35.1.35.G: 1.1.35. 1.1.36.1.36.G: 1.1.36. 1.1.37.1.37.G: 1.1.37. 1.1.38.1.38.G: 1.1.38. 1.1.39.1.39.G: 1.1.39. 1.1.40.1.40.G: 1.1.40.; I: 1.40. 1.1.41.1.41.G: 1.1.41. Colophons: H, N: 41; I: 41; O: 41. Adhyāya 1, Pāda 2 CAWhitneyMss. 1.2.1.1.42.G: 1.2.1. 1.2.2.1.43.G: 1.2.2. 1.2.3.1.43.G: 1.2.3. 1.2.4.1.44.G: 1.2.4. 1.2.5.1.45.G: 1.2.5. 1.2.6.1.46.G: 1.2.6. 1.2.7.1.47.G: 1.2.7. 1.2.8.1.48.G: 1.2.8. 1.2.9.1.49.G: 1.2.9. 1.2.10.1.50.G: 1.2.10.; I: 10. 1.2.11.1.51.G: 1.2.11. 1.2.12.1.52.G: 1.2.12. 1.2.13.1.53.G: 1.2.13. 1.2.14.1.54.G: 1.2.14. 1.2.15.1.55.G: 1.2.15. 1.2.16.1.56.G: 1.2.16. 1.2.17.1.57.G: 1.2.17. 1.2.18.1.58.G: 1.2.18. 1.2.19.1.59.G: 1.2.19. 1.2.20.1.60.G: 1.2.20. 1.2.21.1.61.G: 1.2.21. 1.2.22.1.62.G: 1.2.22.; I: 21.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 17 Colophons: H, N: 62 rules in the first two Pādas; O: 21 (for this Pāda, agrees with I). Adhyāya 1, Pāda 3. CAWhitneyMss. 1.3.1.1.63.G: 1.3.1. 1.3.2.1.64.G: 1.3.2. 1.3.3.1.65.G: 1.3.3. 1.3.4.1.66.G: 1.3.4. 1.3.5.1.67.G: 1.3.5. 1.3.6.1.68.G: 1.3.6. 1.3.7.1.69.G: 1.3.7. 1.3.8.1.70.G: 1.3.8. 1.3.9.1.71.G: 1.3.9. 1.3.10.1.72.G: 1.3.10. 1.3.11.1.73.G: 1.3.10.; I: 16(?) 1.3.12.1.74.G: 1.3.11. 1.3.13.1.75.G: 1.3.12. 1.3.14.1.76.G: 1.3.13. 1.3.15.1.77.G: 1.3.14. 1.3.16.1.78.G: 1.3.15. 1.3.17.1.79.G: 1.3.16. 1.3.18.1.80.G: 1.3.17. 1.3.19.1.81.G: 1.3.18. 1.3.20.1.82.G: 1.3.19.; I: 20. 1.3.21.1.83.G: 1.3.20. 1.3.22.1.84.G: 1.3.21. 1.3.23.1.85.G: 1.3.22. 1.3.24.1.86.G: 1.3.23. 1.3.25.1.87.G: 1.3.24. 1.3.26.1.88.G: 1.3.25. 1.3.27.1.89.G: 1.3.27. 1.3.28.1.90.G: 1.3.26. 1.3.29.1.91.G: 1.3.28., I: 29. Colophons: H, N: 91 (cumulative); O: 29 (matches with the number in I).

18 INTRODUCTION Adhyāya 1, Pāda 4. CAWhitneyMss. 1.4.1.1.92.G: 1.4.1. 1.4.2.1.93.G: 1.4.2. 1.4.3.1.94. 1.4.4.1.95. 1.4.5.1.96. 1.4.6.1.97. 1.4.7.1.98.G: 1.4.7. 1.4.8.1.99.G: 1.4.8. 1.4.9.1.100. 1.4.10.1.101. 1.4.11.1.102. 1.4.12.1.103. 1.4.13.1.104. 1.4.14.1.105. Colophons: C: 103 (cumulative); H, N: 13 (for this Pāda); I: 110 (cumula- tive); O: 19 (for this Pāda). While the figures given in C, H, and N are close, though not identical, with the numbers in our edition, the numbers given in O and I are somewhat problematic. It is not clear for instance, how O arrives at the number 19 for the rules in this Pāda. The text found in I and O does not offer any additional rules. Adhyāya 2, Pāda 1. CAWhitneyMss. 2.1.1.2.1. 2.1.2.2.2. 2.1.3.2.3. 2.1.4.2.4. 2.1.5.2.5. 2.1.6.2.6. 2.1.7.2.7. 2.1.8.2.8. 2.1.9.2.9.I: 10.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 19 2.1.10.2.10. 2.1.11.2.11. 2.1.12.2.12. 2.1.13.2.13. 2.1.14.2.14. 2.1.15.2.15. 2.1.16.2.16. 2.1.17.2.17. 2.1.18.2.18. 2.1.19.2.19. 2.1.20.2.20. 2.1.21.2.21.I: 20. 2.1.22.2.22. 2.1.23.2.23. 2.1.24.2.24. 2.1.25.2.25. 2.1.26.2.26. 2.1.27.2.27. 2.1.28.2.28. 2.1.29.2.29. 2.1.30.2.30. 2.1.31.2.31. 2.1.32.2.32. 2.1.33.2.33. 2.1.34.2.34. 2.1.35.2.35. 2.1.36.2.36. 2.1.37.2.37. 2.1.38.2.38. 2.1.39.2.39.I: 39. Colophons: O: 39 (agrees with the final count in I). Adhyāya 2, Pāda 2. CAWhitneyMss. 2.2.1.2.40. 2.2.2.2.41.

20 INTRODUCTION 2.2.3.2.42. 2.2.4.2.43. 2.2.5.2.44. 2.2.6.2.45. 2.2.7.2.46. 2.2.8.2.47. 2.2.9.2.48. 2.2.10.2.49.I: 10. 2.2.11.2.50. 2.2.12.2.51. 2.2.13.2.52. 2.2.14.2.53. 2.2.15.2.54. 2.2.16.2.55. 2.2.17.2.56. 2.2.18.2.57. 2.2.19.2.58. 2.2.20.2.59.I: 20. Colophons: H, N: 59 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); O: 20 (agrees with the count in I). Adhyāya 2, Pāda 3. CAWhitneyMss. 2.3.1.2.60. 2.3.2.2.61. 2.3.3.2.62. 2.3.4.2.63. 2.3.5.2.64. 2.3.6.2.65. 2.3.7.2.66. 2.3.8.2.67. 2.3.9.2.68. 2.3.10.2.69. 2.3.11.2.70. 2.3.12.2.71. 2.3.13.2.72.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 21 2.3.14.2.73. 2.3.15.2.74. 2.3.16.2.75. 2.3.17.2.76. 2.3.18.2.77. 2.3.19.2.78. 2.3.20.2.79. 2.3.21.2.80.I: 21. Colophons: H, N: 80 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); O: 21 (for this Pāda, agrees with the count in I). Adhyāya 2, Pāda 4. CAWhitneyMss. 2.4.1.2.81. 2.4.2.2.82. 2.4.3.2.83. 2.4.4.2.84. 2.4.5.2.85. 2.4.6.2.86. 2.4.7.2.87. 2.4.8.2.88. 2.4.9.2.89. 2.4.10.2.90.I: 10. 2.4.11.2.91. 2.4.12.2.92. 2.4.13.2.93. 2.4.14.2.94. 2.4.15.2.95. 2.4.16.2.96. 2.4.17.2.97. 2.4.18.2.98. 2.4.19.2.99. 2.4.20.2.100.I: 20. 2.4.21.2.101. 2.4.22.2.102. 2.4.23.2.103.

22 INTRODUCTION 2.4.24.2.104. 2.4.25.2.105. 2.4.26.2.106. 2.4.27.2.107.I: 26. Colophons: H, N: 106 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); I: 107 (cumulative for this Adhyāya), 217 (cumulative for the first two Adhyāyas); O: 37 (error for 27?). Adhyāya 3, Pāda 1. CAWhitneyMss. 3.1.1.3.1. 3.1.2.3.2. 3.1.3.3.3. 3.1.4.3.4. 3.1.5.3.5. 3.1.6.3.6. 3.1.7.3.7. 3.1.8.3.8. 3.1.9.3.9. 3.1.10.3.10. 3.1.11.3.11.I: 11. 3.1.12.3.12. 3.1.13.3.13. 3.1.14.3.14. 3.1.15.3.15. 3.1.16.3.16. 3.1.17.3.17. 3.1.18.3.18. 3.1.19.3.19. 3.1.20.3.20. 3.1.21.3.21. 3.1.22.3.22. 3.1.23.3.23. 3.1.24.3.24. 3.1.25.3.25. Colophons: O: 25.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 23 Adhyāya 3, Pāda 2. CAWhitneyMss. 3.2.1.3.26. 3.2.2.3.27. 3.2.3.3.28. 3.2.4.missing 3.2.5.missing 3.2.6.3.29. 3.2.7.3.30. 3.2.8.3.31. 3.2.9.3.32. 3.2.10.3.33.I: 10. 3.2.11.3.34.I: 11. 3.2.12.3.35. 3.2.13.3.36. 3.2.14.3.37. 3.2.15.3.38. 3.2.16.3.39. 3.2.17.3.40. 3.2.18.3.41. 3.2.19.3.42. 3.2.20.3.43. 3.2.21.3.44. 3.2.22.3.45. 3.2.23.3.46. 3.2.24.3.47. 3.2.25.3.48. 3.2.26.3.49. 3.2.27.3.50. 3.2.28.3.51. 3.2.29.3.52. 3.2.30.3.53. 3.2.31.3.54.I: 31. Colophons: O: 31 (agrees with the count in I).

24 INTRODUCTION Adhyāya 3, Pāda 3. CAWhitneyMss. 3.3.1.commentary 3.3.2.commentary 3.3.3.commentary 3.3.4.commentary 3.3.5.commentary 3.3.6.3.55. 3.3.7.3.56. 3.3.8.3.57. 3.3.9.3.58. 3.3.10.3.59. 3.3.11.3.60. 3.3.12.3.61. 3.3.13.3.62. 3.3.14.3.63. 3.3.15.3.64. 3.3.16.3.65. 3.3.17.3.66. 3.3.18.3.67. 3.3.19.3.68. 3.3.20.3.69. 3.3.21.3.70. 3.3.22.3.71. 3.3.23.3.72. 3.3.24.3.73. 3.3.25.3.74. 3.3.26.commentary 3.3.27.commentary 3.3.28.commentary 3.3.29.commentary 3.3.30.commentary 3.3.31.commentary 3.3.32.commentary 3.3.33. commentary 3.3.34.commentary 3.3.35.commentary

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 25 Colophons: O: 40. Where are the five additional rules? Possibly the first four verses and the fifth rule are each counted as being two Sūtras. Adhyāya 3, Pāda 4. CAWhitneyMss. 3.4.1.3.75. 3.4.2.3.76. 3.4.3.3.77. 3.4.4.3.78. 3.4.5.3.79. 3.4.6.3.80. 3.4.7.missing 3.4.8.missing 3.4.9.missing 3.4.10.missingI: 10. 3.4.11.missing 3.4.12.3.81. 3.4.13.3.82. 3.4.14.3.83. 3.4.15.3.84. 3.4.16.3.85. 3.4.17.3.86. 3.4.18.missing 3.4.19.3.87. 3.4.20.3.88. 3.4.21.3.89. 3.4.22.3.90. 3.4.23.3.91. 3.4.24.3.92. 3.4.25.3.93. 3.4.26.3.94. 3.4.27.3.95. 3.4.28.3.96.I: 29. Colophons: H: 105 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); I: 125 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); O: 29 (identical with the count in I). The difference of twenty rules in the counting for this Adhyāya in the mss. H and I can be explained only on the assumption that H considered certain passages as belonging to the

26 INTRODUCTION commentary. This refers in all likelihood to CA 3.3.1-5 and CA 3.3.26-35. In our count, these are 15 rules, which Whitney relegated to the commentary. However, as the colophon in O on Adhyāya 3, Pāda 3 shows, some traditions counted 40 rules in this Pāda, instead of our 35. There is a strong possibility that the verses in CA 3.3.1-4, and the prose in CA 3.3.5, were counted as having two rules each. This accounts for 20 rules. It is clear that the ms H of the CAB contains all these passages and yet does not count them as Sūtras. On the other hand, the ms. I gives 125 as the total number of rules in this Adhyāya, indicating that it includes these passages as part of the text. This is also supported by the ms. O. Adhyāya 4, Pāda 1. CAWhitneyMss. 4.1.1.commentary 4.1.2.commentary 4.1.3.commentary 4.1.4.commentary 4.1.5.commentary 4.1.6.commentary 4.1.7.commentary 4.1.8.commentary 4.1.9.commentary 4.1.10.commentary 4.1.11.commentary 4.1.12.commentary 4.1.13.commentary 4.1.14.commentary 4.1.15.commentary 4.1.16.commentary 4.1.17.commentary 4.1.18.commentary 4.1.19.commentary 4.1.20.commentary 4.1.21.commentary 4.1.22.commentary 4.1.23.4.1. 4.1.24.4.2.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 27 4.1.25.4.3. 4.1.26.4.4. 4.1.27.4.5. 4.1.28.4.6. 4.1.29.4.7.I: 48. 4.1.30.4.8.I: 49. 4.1.31.4.9.I: 50. 4.1.32.4.10. 4.1.33.4.11. 4.1.34.4.12. 4.1.35.4.13. 4.1.36.4.14. 4.1.37.4.15. 4.1.38.4.16. 4.1.39.4.17. 4.1.40.4.18. 4.1.41.4.19.I: 60. 4.1.42.4.20. 4.1.43.4.21. 4.1.44.4.22. 4.1.45.4.23. 4.1.46.4.24. 4.1.47.4.25. 4.1.48.4.26. 4.1.49.4.27. 4.1.50.4.28. 4.1.51.4.29.I: two rules 70, 71. 4.1.52.4.30. 4.1.53.4.31. 4.1.54.4.32. 4.1.55.4.33. 4.1.56.4.34. 4.1.57.4.35. 4.1.58.4.36. 4.1.59.4.37. 4.1.60.4.38.I: 80. 4.1.61.4.39. 4.1.62.4.40. 4.1.63.4.41.

28 INTRODUCTION 4.1.64.4.42. 4.1.65.4.43. 4.1.66.4.44. 4.1.67.4.45. 4.1.68.4.46. Colophons: H: 47. This agrees with Whitney’s exclusion of CA 4.1.1-22 as belonging to the commentary and not to the text of the CA. On the other hand I gives 98 as the number of rules in this Pāda, while O gives 99 as the number of the same rules. Our number is 68. How do we account for this difference? We can only suggest that the passages in CA 4.1.1-22 were differently sliced into separate sūtras by the traditions represented by I and O. While the manuscript H physically contains these passages, it does not count them among the Sūtras of the CA. We have no way of knowing how exactly these passages were subdivided. Adhyāya 4, Pāda 2. CAWhitneyMss. 4.2.1.4.47. 4.2.2.4.48. 4.2.3.4.49. 4.2.4.4.50. 4.2.5.4.51. 4.2.6.4.52. 4.2.7.4.53. 4.2.8.4.54. 4.2.9.4.55. 4.2.10.4.56. 4.2.11.4.57. 4.2.12.4.58. 4.2.13.4.59. 4.2.14.4.60. 4.2.15.4.61. 4.2.16.4.62. 4.2.17.4.63. 4.2.18.4.64. 4.2.19.4.65.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 29 4.2.20.4.66. 4.2.21.4.67. 4.2.22.4.68. 4.2.23.4.69. 4.2.24.4.70. 4.2.25.4.71. 4.2.26.4.72.I: 29 Colophons: O: 29. This agrees with I. Where are the three additional rules? Adhyāya 4, Pāda 3. CAWhitneyMss. 4.3.1.4.73. 4.3.2.4.74. 4.3.3.4.75. 4.3.4.4.76. 4.3.5.4.77. 4.3.6.4.78. 4.3.7.4.79. 4.3.8.4.80. 4.3.9.4.81. 4.3.10.4.82.I: 10. 4.3.11.4.83. 4.3.12.4.84. 4.3.13.4.85. 4.3.14.4.86. 4.3.15.4.87. 4.3.16.4.88. 4.3.17.4.89. 4.3.18.4.90. 4.3.19.4.91. 4.3.20.4.92. 4.3.21.4.93. 4.3.22.missing 4.3.23.4.94. 4.3.24.4.95. 4.3.25.4.96.

30 INTRODUCTION 4.3.26.4.97. 4.3.27.4.98. 4.3.28.4.99. 4.3.29.4.100.I: 30. Colophons: H: 102 (cumulative for this Adhyāya); I, O: 30 (for this Pāda). Adhyāya 4, Pāda 4. CAWhitneyMss. 4.4.1.4.101. 4.4.2.4.102. 4.4.3.4.103. 4.4.4.4.104. 4.4.5.4.105. 4.4.6.4.106. 4.4.7.4.107. 4.4.8.missing 4.4.9.4.108. 4.4.10.4.109.I: 10. 4.4.11.4.110. 4.4.12.4.111. 4.4.13.4.112. 4.4.14.4.113. 4.4.15.4.114. 4.4.16.4.115. 4.4.17.4.116. 4.4.18.4.117. 4.4.19.4.118.I: 20. 4.4.20.4.119. 4.4.21.4.120. 4.4.22.4.121. 4.4.23.4.122. 4.4.24.4.123. 4.4.25.4.124. 4.4.26.4.125. 4.4.27.4.126.I: 26.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 31 Colophons: F: 580 (total for all Adhyāyas); G: 174 (for this Adhyāya); I: 27 (for this Pāda), 174 (for this Adhyāya), 516 (total for all Adhyāyas); O: 27 (for this Pāda). Our total for all the rules of the CA is 483, while Whitney’s total comes to 435. The difference is accounted for by Whitney’s exclusion of certain passages which he thought belonged to the commentary rather than to the text of the CA. The figure 516 found in the ms. I as the total for all the rules is explainable by supposing that this counting resulted because of primarily the included verses being represented as each containing at least two Sūtras, if not more. There are actually no extra passages as such. The figure 580 found in the ms. F as the total of all rules could possibly accounted for if we assume that each of the included verses is equivalent to four Sūtras. Such a calculation comes close to this figure. Again, we must note that the ms. F does not actually have any extra passages as such. 4. General Features of the Ancient Indian Phonetics1 4.1. Ancient Indian Phonetics 4.1.1. The tradition of phonetic analysis and description of Sanskrit in ancient India developed as one of the traditional tools used for the preserva- tion and propagation of the Vedas, the religious scriptures of the ancient Hindus and it eventually came to be incorporated in a vastly developed tradition of Sanskrit grammar. While the Vedic literature was originally composed by individual Vedic priests and was orally maintained by generations of Vedic priestly families, eventually the Vedic texts came to be collected and edited into organized volumes, and systematic efforts were made to preserve both the texts themselves as well as the understanding of the meaning and the ritual application of these texts. The results of this organized effort have survived in the form of manuals of various kinds pertaining to various Vedic schools. Among these manuals, many deal with topics of linguistic interest, i.e. phonetics (Śikṣā), metrics (Chandas), etymology (Nirukta), and grammar (Vyākaraṇa). The treatises on phonetics, generally divided into two types called Śikṣās and Prātiśākhyas, deal with specific Vedic texts and their recitation, rather than dealing with Sanskrit or Vedic language as such. This makes the

1 This section of the Introduction is a revised and expanded version of my article “Ancient Indian Phonetics” which appeared in The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Volume 6, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1994. I am grateful to the publisher for granting me permission to incorporate this revised version here.

32 INTRODUCTION phonetic manuals very special in some sense. The observations contained in the phonetic manuals are of a non-generalized, highly specific nature, and thus they provide for us a microscopically detailed picture of the sounds of Sanskrit as used in specific oral scriptural traditions. They contain a highly developed set of analytical tools and terminology which has won the admiration of Western linguists and Sanskritists ever since the discovery of Sanskrit by the West (cf. Whitney 1884, Allen 1953: 3ff). 4.2. Origins of Sanskrit Phonetics 4.2.1. The various Vedic texts were produced in different regions of India, beginning with about 1500 B.C. in the Northwestern corner, and the texts produced in one region were carried orally into other areas. During this movement, there was social and linguistic contact and convergence with peo- ples who were historically of non-Indo-European backgrounds, e.g. Dravidi- ans, Tibeto-Burmans, and Austro-Asiatics. As a result of this contact and convergence, the Indo-Aryan dialects continuously went on changing and slowly a gap began to develop between the language of the preserved ancient scriptures and the language of the contemporary colloquial usage. This gap began to affect both the phonetic form of the orally preserved scriptural texts as well as their comprehension. A realization of this gap and its perceived negative impact on the preserved scriptural texts is indeed the starting point of the development of the analytical efforts reflected in the manuals left to us by the Vedic schools. On the phonetic side, it is quite clear that the same text was pronounced with slight differences eventually leading to doubts as to the exact wording. Emergence of sounds such as the retroflex consonants within the Indo-Aryan dialects was a gradual process leading to more or less retroflexed versions of the same Vedic text. The accents of ancient Vedic dialects were preserved as musical pitch variation in the recitation of Vedic texts, but these were no longer used in the colloquial contemporary dialects. Thus, it became increasingly difficult to naturally pronounce the Vedic texts with proper accents. The late Vedic texts (e.g. Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa 1.6.3.8-10) narrate an interesting story about how a demon named Tvaṣṭr̥ mispronounced a ritual expression and achieved disastrous results. The demon wished to have a son who would slay god Indra. Thus, he should have asked for a son who would be indraśatrú ‘Indra’s slayer.’ However, being an ignorant demon, he mispronounced this expression as índraśatru which gave him a son who was killed by Indra. The version of this story in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa says that the demon actually should have said: indrasya śatrur vardhasva. This has been

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 33 interpreted by scholars like Johannes Bronkhorst to suggest that using the proper accents for compounds had already become so difficult by this time, that the text asks that the compound be broken down to a phrase to avoid the confusion once for all. This story has been cited by phoneticians and grammarians to indicate why it is so important to learn how to properly pronounce the Vedic scriptures. 4.2.2. The pre-scientific phase of Sanskrit phonetics is already mani- fest in the earliest Vedic literature. The terms akṣara ‘letter, sound, syllable’ and pada ‘metrical foot,’ [and ‘word’ in some contexts] go back to the different phases of the Vedic literature. Thieme (1985) has presented an important conjecture concerning the beginnings of Sanskrit phonetics. Thieme translates the first verse of the Śaunakīya-Atharvaveda as follows: ये त्रि॑ष॒प्ताः प॑रि॒यन्ति॒ विश्वा॑ रू॒पाणि॒ बिभ्र॑तः । वा॒चस्पति॒र्बला॒ तेष॑ां त॒न्वो॑ अ॒द्य द॑धातु मे ॥ (शौ.अ.वे. १.१.१) “The thrice seven that go around, wearing all the shapes – let the Lord of Speech put their powers into my body’s parts today.” After detailed argumentation, Thieme concludes that this verse refers to twenty-one sounds of Sanskrit as distinctly conceived by the earliest Vedic thinkers and he lists them as follows: a i u r̥ e o ai au8 vowels y r l v4 semi-vowels k c ṭ t p5 occlusives ś ṣ s h4 spirants Thieme (1985: 563) argues that “the sacred number ‘thrice seven’ could indeed be taken as the number of the abstract forms (ākr̥ti-), of the types, the kinds (varṇa-) of sounds of the sacred language.” Such a listing, if indeed this is what is intended by the verse, would indicate that certain phonetic features were perhaps understood more clearly by this time than others, and that the number twenty-one, in all likelihood, is a reflection of this early pre-scientific phase, rather than an explicit representation of the “types” of Sanskrit sounds as found in the later developed texts on Sanskrit phonetics. Perhaps, the distinctions between the different points of articulation were implicitly understood, while the distinctions of quantity, voicing, aspiration, etc. were not arrived at.

34 INTRODUCTION 4.2.3. However, there is one major difficulty in accepting Thieme’s interpretation. It is not clear that all the classes of sounds listed by him in order to arrive at the number twenty-one were definitely recognized by the ancient phoneticians in India. We find several phonetic categories mentioned explicitly in late Vedic texts like the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka (2.2.4): तद्वा इदं बृहतीसहस्रं सम्पन्नम् । तस्य यानि व्यञ्जनानि तच्छरीरं, यो घोषः स आत्मा, य ऊष्माणः स प्राणः । “Thus, this [collection of] a thousand br̥hatī verses comes into existence. Of that collection, the consonants (vyañjana) are the body, the voice (ghoṣa = vowels) is its soul, and the spirants (ūṣman) are its vital breath.” In the Chāndogya-Upaniṣad (2.22.5), vowels (svara) are distinguished explicitly from consonants (vyañjana), and among the consonants, a distinction is made between stops, i.e. sparśa ‘contact sounds,’ and spirants, i.e. ūṣman ‘aspiration sounds’: सर्वे स्वरा घोषवन्तो बलवन्तो वक्तव्याः … सर्व ऊष्माणोऽग्रस्ता अनिरस्ता विवृता वक्तव्याः … सर्वे स्पर्शा लेशेनानभिहिता वक्तव्याः । “All vowels (svara) should be pronounced with resonance (ghoṣa) and force. … All spirants (ūṣman) should be pro- nounced open, and not constricted or spitted out. … All stops (sparśa = contact sounds) should be pronounced slightly in- complete.” 4.2.4. While these terms seem to have been well established by the period of the Āraṇyakas, such is indeed not the case with the category of antaḥsthā. The Aitareya-Āraṇyaka (3.2.1) tells us that the specific category of semi-vowels (antasthā / antaḥsthā) was newly proposed by the scholar Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya, but that it was as yet not recognized by the author of the Aitareya- Āraṇyaka. तस्यैतस्यात्मनः प्राण ऊष्मरूपमस्थीनि स्पर्शरूपं मज्जानः स्वररूपं मांसं लोहितमित्येतदन्यच्चतुर्थमन्त(ः)स्थारूपमिति ह स्माह ह्रस्वो माण्डूकेयः । त्रयं त्वेव न एतत्प्रोक्तम् । “Of this self, the breath is like the spirants (ūṣman), the bones the mutes (sparśa), the marrow the vowels (svara), and flesh and blood the fourth part, the semi-vowels (antasthā). So says

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 35 Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya. However, only three elements have been taught to us.” We know from other evidence (Deshpande 1979: 261) that the scholarly tradition of Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya came from the Northeastern region of Magadha, and that it is an innovative tradition, which among other things admitted more retroflexion into the oral text of the R̥gveda, and that its views were contested by others. If indeed the above statement of the Aitareya- Āraṇyaka can be interpreted as an indication that the category of antaḥsthā was a relatively late category, this then raises serious doubts concerning Paul Thieme’s interpretation of the first verse of the Śaunakīya-Atharvaveda as referring to twenty-one types of Sanskrit sounds including the four antaḥsthā sounds. If the inference based on the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka is correct, it would seem more likely that in a much more ancient period, such as the composition of the AV hymns, the vowels and the semi-vowels were not analytically distinguished from each other. Since the semi-vowels are not covered by either the term sparśa or ūṣman appearing in the Āraṇyaka literature, the non- distinction of semi-vowels from vowels is perhaps the strongest possibility for the earlier period. If vowels and semi-vowels were not yet clearly distinguished at this early period of the composition of the Saṃhitās, we may need to reconsider our understanding of the early form of the Saṃhitās as conceived by the pre-Āraṇyaka traditions. I am simply mentioning this subject here. I shall deal with it exhaustively on another occasion. 4.3. Emergence of Formal Phonetic Analysis 4.3.1. Sometime around 700 B.C., a standardized ordered alphabet of Sanskrit called akṣarasamāmnāya had come into existence. By this process, I am referring to an ordered presentation or grouping of Sanskrit sounds, with no necessary connection with any form of writing. This standardization was necessitated, among other things, by an increasing diglossic gap between the language of the orally preserved Vedic texts and the contemporary Sanskrit, as well as the vernacular languages. There was a perceived loss of the natural ability to correctly pronounce and recite the Vedic scriptures. The discussions concerning the need to study Sanskrit phonetics as seen in the introductory chapter of the MB of Patañjali (± 100 B.C.) show that the origin of the analytical tradition of Sanskrit phonetics lies in the urge to preserve the standardized pronunciation of the Vedic texts and to protect them from further deterioration.

36 INTRODUCTION 4.3.2. The earliest scholars who seem to have paid attention to the form of the Vedic texts, especially their wording and pronunciation, are Śākalya, Śūravīra Māṇḍūkeya, and Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya. The Aitareya- Āraṇyaka (3.2.6) points to the fact that Śākalya followed the tradition of the Māṇḍūkeyas to a large extent:2 अथ हास्मा एतत्कृष्णहारितो वाग्ब्राह्मणमिवोपोदाहरति । प्रजापतिः प्रजाः सृष्ट्वा व्यस्रंसत संवत्सरः । स च्छन्दोभिरात्मानं समदधात् तस्मात्संहिता । तस्यै वा एतस्यै संहितायै णकारो बलं षकारः प्राण आत्मा । स यो हैतौ णकारषकारवनुसंहितमृचो वेद सबलां सप्राणां संहितां वेदायुष्यमिति विद्यात्। स यदि विचिकित्सेत्सणकारं ब्रवाणी३ँ अणकाराँ३ इति सणकारमेव ब्रूयात्सषकारं ब्रवाणी३ँ अषकाराँ३ इति सषकारमेव ब्रूयात्। ते यद् वयमनुसंहितमृचोऽधीमहे यच्च माण्डूकेयीयमध्यायं प्रब्रूमस्तेन नो णकारषकारा उपाप्ताविति ह स्माह ह्रस्वो माण्डूकेयः । अथ यद्वयमनुसंहित- मृचोऽधीमहे यच्च माण्डूकेयीयमध्यायं प्रब्रूमस्तेन नो णकारषकारा उपाप्ता- विति ह स्माह स्थविरः शाकल्यः । (Edited by A.B. Keith. Oxford University Press, 1909, pp. 138-9) Now Kr̥ṣṇahārīta proclaims this secret doctrine, as it were, re- garding speech to him. Prajāpati, the year, after creating creatures, burst. He put himself together by means of the meters, therefore it is the saṃhitā. Of that saṃhitā, the letter ṇ is the strength, the letter ṣ the breath, the self. He who knows the saṃhitā and the letters ṇ and ṣ, he knows the saṃhitā with its breath and its strength. … If he is in doubt whether to say it with an ṇ or without an ṇ, let him say it with an ṇ. If he is in doubt whether to say it with an ṣ or without an ṣ, let him say it with an ṣ. Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya says: “If we repeat the verses according to the Saṃhitā, and if we recite according to the teaching of the Māṇḍūkeya, then the letters ṇ and ṣ are obtained for us.”

2 The Śāṃkhāyana-Āraṇyaka 8.11 (ed. by Bhim Dev, Vishveshvarananda Vaidika Research Institute, Hoshiarpur, 1980) contains an important variant of the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka passage: ते यद्वयमनुसंहितमृचोऽधीमहे यच्च माण्डूकेयीयमध्यायं प्रब्रूमस्तेन नो णकारषकारा उपाप्ताविति ह स्माह ह्रस्वो माण्डूकेयः । अथ यद्वयमनुसंहितमृचोऽधीमहे यच्च स्वाध्यायमधीमहे, तेना नो णकारषकारा उपाप्ताविति ह स्माह स्थविरः शाकल्यः । While the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka passage clearly indicates that Śākalya was a follower of the Māṇḍūkeya school on certain matters, the Śāṃkhāyana- Āraṇyaka makes this relationship a little less clear. The introductory section called Vargadvaya at the beginning of the R̥gvedaprātiśākhya seems to suggest that the Māṇḍūkeyas were more ancient, and it seems more likely that the relationship as inferred from the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka is historically justified.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 37 Sthavira Śākalya says: “If we repeat the verses according to the Saṃhitā, and if we recite according to the teaching of the Māṇḍūkeya, then the letters ṇ and ṣ are obtained for us.” 4.3.3. These authorities were also perhaps some of the earliest schol- arly figures who attempted to construct rules for combining words of the Padapāṭha to produce a continuous scriptural text (saṃhitā). The general assumption seems to have been that the continuous Vedic texts needed to be explicitly produced by applying the rules of sandhi to the word-by-word texts provided by scholars like Śākalya (cf. padaprakr̥tiḥ saṃhitā, NR 1.17; RPR 2.1). Thus, these early traditions did not offer any details on how to segment the received continuous texts, but they were engaged in figuring out the rules of sandhi which applied to the word-by-word texts to recreate the continuous texts. Thus, the concern of these early phoneticians and exegetes was two- fold, i.e. the proper pronunciation of the Vedic texts and figuring out the rules for performing sandhi operations on the word-by-word texts to produce the continuous texts. The first concern was responsible for developing the analytical study of the articulation of sounds, while the second concern was responsible for the search for features and groupings of these sounds which could be used in formulating the rules of sandhi. In these two concerns, we can see the origins of the phonetic and phonological theories of the ancient Indian phoneticians and grammarians. 4.3.4. The word śikṣā refers to training in general, and phonetic or recitational training in particular. It appears in the Taittirīya-Upaniṣad (1.2) which refers specifically to six types of training involved in phonetic education, i.e. varṇa ‘sounds,’ svara ‘accents,’ mātrā ‘quantity,’ bala ‘force,’ sāma ‘even articulation,’ and santāna ‘continuity in recitation.’ In later times, over a hundred texts called Śikṣās were produced by different authorities. Most of the surviving Śikṣā texts are of a relatively late period. The most well known among these Śikṣās is the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā attributed by the tradition to the fa- mous Sanskrit grammarian Pāṇini. Other important Śikṣās include the Vyāsaśikṣā, the Āpiśaliśikṣā, the Yājñavalkyaśikṣā, and the Nāradaśikṣā. A few of these Śikṣā texts, such as the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā and the Āpiśaliśikṣā, are non-“sectarian” in the sense that they do not attach themselves to a particular Vedic school, and deal with the Sanskrit language in a generic way. However, most Śikṣā texts are “sectarian.” They are attached to particular Vedic schools, and deal with the recitation of particular Vedic texts. They often provide the most minute details of the recitational practice.

38 INTRODUCTION 4.3.5. The second category of texts dealing with Sanskrit phonetics, traditionally considered to be more authoritative than the Śikṣās, is represented by the Prātiśākhyas. As the word prātiśākhya [< prati ‘each’ + śākhā ‘branch’] suggests, each branch of the Vedic literature was ideally expected to have a Prātiśākhya text attached to it. Among the surviving texts of this type, we must mention the following important treatises. The R̥gveda-Prātiśākhya attributed to Śaunaka belongs to the Śaiśirīya branch of the R̥gveda, which is no longer extant. It refers to the views of Śākalya, whose edition of the R̥gveda survives, but there is no extant Prātiśākhya attributed to Śākalya. The Taittirīya- Prātiśākhya is attached to the Taittirīya school of the Black Yajurveda. The Vājasaneyi-Prātiśākhya is attached to the White Yajurveda. A text called the Bhāṣika-Sūtra deals with the recitation of the late Vedic prose text of the Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa belonging to the tradition of the White Yajurveda. There are five texts which fall in the general category of the Prātiśākhyas of the Sāmaveda. Of these five texts, only the R̥ktantra deals with the general discussion of phonetics. There are two texts, i.e. the Atharva-Prātiśākhya and the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā, associated with the Śaunakīya school of the Atharvaveda. The exact dating of the Śikṣās and the Prātiśākhyas has been a topic of long-standing debates. In general, one can say that the existing Śikṣās seem to be “all of them, young, elaborations of the definitions laid down in the Prātiśākhyas,” (Thieme 1935: 85-6). The existing Prātiśākhyas themselves seem to have old and new textual layers in them, some pre-dating the grammarian Pāṇini (± 500 B.C.), others reflecting post-Pāṇinian develop- ments. 4.4. Formation of Sanskrit Alphabet 4.4.1. Referred to by the term akṣara-samāmnāya ‘collective state- ment of sounds,’ an ordered Sanskrit alphabet, with no reference to writing intended, seems to have come into existence by the time the late Vedic literature (about 700 B.C.) was produced. A distinction between vowels and consonants was already made. The consonants were generally divided into three categories, sparśa ‘contact sounds,’ antaḥsthā ‘in-between sounds,’ and uṣman ‘aspiration sounds.’ The first category included stops and nasals, the second category included semi-vowels, and the third category included spirants. A further amplification resulted in the following generally accepted alphabet:

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 39 Vowels:a ā i ī u ū r̥ r̥̄ l̥ e o ai au Consonants: sparśa:k khg gh ṅ cchjjhñ ṭṭhḍḍhṇ tthddhn pphbbhm antaḥsthā:yrlv ūṣmanś ṣsh Additional sounds: Anusvāraṃ Visargaḥ Jihvāmūlīyaḫ (before k, kh) Upadhmānīyaẖ (before p, ph) 4.4.2. The above alphabet, or rather the formal listing of sounds, is accepted with minor differences by all the Śikṣās and Prātiśākhyas. The al- phabet shows a tacit awareness of several features of sounds, and a certain ordering of those features. The vowels are grouped into several sub-groups. The first group is represented by the vowels a, ā, i, ī, u, and ū. These are the basic simple vowels. They are ordered back-to-front in terms of their points of articulation, i.e. throat (kaṇṭha), palate (tālu), and lips (oṣṭha). This order is the reverse of the front-to-back order of listing the sounds in western linguistics, e.g. p, t, k. To these basic simple vowels are added the vocalic r̥, r̥̄, l̥, (and l̥̄ for some traditions). All these together, beginning with a, are called samāna ‘simple’ vowels. They are grouped into pairs of short and long vowels, and each pair is often subsumed under a common generalization called varṇa, e.g. the vowels a and ā belong to the family or type designated by the term a-varṇa. After the simple vowels comes the group of four vowels, i.e. e, o, ai, and au. These four are generally called sandhyakṣaras ‘compound-vowels.’ Out of these four, the first two are often, though not always, described as monophthongs, while the latter two are most often explicitly called dvi-varṇa ‘consisting of two sounds,’ i.e. diphthongs. The principle of back-to-front ordering in terms of the points of articulations is maintained even in the sub- groups e, o, and ai, au. As we move to the category of sounds called sparśa

40 INTRODUCTION ‘contact sounds, ’ i.e. stops and nasals, we see several converging principles at work. The five horizontal groups are each called a varga ‘group,’ i.e. k(a)- varga, c(a)-varga, ṭ(a)-varga, t(a)-varga, and p(a)-varga. The vertical ordering of these groups shows the same back-to-front ordering, with the k(a)-varga at the back end of the spectrum of points of articulation and the p(a)-varga at the front end of the same spectrum. The palatal, the retroflex, and the dental groups are ordered between the velar and the labial groups. The vertical lines intersecting these five groups show other phonetic features. The first vertical group, i.e. k, c, ṭ, t, and p, consists of voiceless unaspirated stops. The second vertical group, i.e. kh, ch, ṭh, th, and ph, consists of voiceless aspirated stops. The third vertical group, i.e. g, j, ḍ, d, and b, consists of voiced unaspirated stops. The fourth vertical group, i.e. gh, jh, ḍh, dh, and bh, consists of voiced aspirated stops. The fifth vertical group, i.e. ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m, consists of nasals. 4.4.3. The order of consonants in each of the five horizontal groups of stops and nasals is significant for other theoretical reasons as well. Desh- pande (1976) shows that there were theorists who reduced the total number of primitive sounds to a much smaller number and argued that other Sanskrit sounds were built by combining these primitive sounds. The principal sources of information on these ancient theories are the RPR (13.13; 13.15) and the ancient Śikṣā text quoted by the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya on CA (1.1.12): प्रयोक्तुरीहागुणसंनिपाते वर्णीभवन्गुणविशेषयोगात् । एकः श्रुतीः कर्मणाप्नोति बह्वीः ॥ ऋ.प्रा. १३.१३ ॥ “When the air (coming up from lungs) is associated with a spe- cific desire of the speaker, that air, being transformed into a sound through specific articulatory effort, attains to various auditory forms, because of the acquisition of various proper- ties.” आहुर्घोषं घोषवतामकारमेकेऽनुस्वारमनुनासिकानाम् ॥ सोष्मतां च सोष्मणामूष्मणाहुः सस्थानेन, घोषिणां घोषिणैव ॥ ऋ.प्रा. १३.१५ ॥ “Some call a the voice of the voiced [consonants], and the ṃ [the voice] of the nasal [consonants]. They also say that the aspiration of the [voiceless] aspirated [stops] is [due to a com- bination] with a homorganic spirant, and [the aspiration] of the voiced [aspirated stops] is [due to a combination] with the voiced [spirant, i.e. h].”

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 41 Ancient Śikṣā quoted in CAB on CA (1.1.12): ‘सस्थानैरूष्मभिः पृक्तास्तृतीयाः प्रथमाश्च ये । चतुर्थाश्च द्वितीयाश्च संपद्यन्त इति स्थितिः ॥’ अपर आह । चतुर्थो हकारेणेति । ‘पञ्चैव प्रथमान् स्पर्शानाहुरेके मनीषिणः । तेषां गुणोपसञ्चयादान्यभाव्यं प्रवर्तते ॥ जिह्वामूलीयशषसा उपध्मानीयपञ्चमाः । एतैर्गुणैः समन्विता द्वितीया इति तान्विदुः ॥ त एव सह घोषेण तृतीया इति तान्विदुः । ऊष्मणा च द्वितीयेन चतुर्था इति तान्विदुः ॥ प्रथमाः सह घोषेण यदा स्युरनुनासिकाः । तानाहुः पञ्चमान् स्पर्शांस्तथा वर्णगुणाः स्मृताः ॥ “The thirds and the firsts, combined with homorganic spirants, become the fourths and the seconds. Such is the decision. Another phonetician says: The fourth is [derived] through a combination with h. Some scholars say that there are only five stops, i.e. the firsts [of the respective series]. They are trans- formed into other sounds through their acquisition of different properties. [The firsts, i.e. k, c, ṭ, t, and p], combined respec- tively with these factors, i.e. ḫ (= jihvāmūlīya), ś, ṣ, s, and ẖ (= upadhmānīya), are known as the seconds, [i.e. kh, ch, ṭh, th, and ph]. The same [firsts], when combined with voice (ghoṣa), are known as the thirds, [i.e. g, j, ḍ, d, and b]. [When the thirds are further] combined with a second element, a spirant, they are known as the fourths, [i.e. gh, jh, ḍh, dh, and bh]. When the firsts, combined with voice, are nasalized, they are known as the fifths, [i.e. ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m]. Thus, the properties of the sounds are traditionally recounted.” Thus, for instance, in the series k, kh, g, gh, and ṅ, the first consonant k is deemed to be a primitive consonant. By adding the voiceless velar aspi- ration, i.e. ḫ (jihvāmūlīya), to the primitive k, one derives the voiceless aspirate stop kh. It is important to note that the aspirated stops are called soṣman ‘fused with a spirant’ in Sanskrit indicating their compound nature in terms of these early phonetic theories. My best guess is that this theory developed after the period of the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka, which knows the term ūṣman, but not soṣman. The latter is obviously derived from the former, and hence comes after the former, at least logically, if not also chronologically. Similarly, the

42 INTRODUCTION sound g is derived by adding the primitive voice (ghoṣa) a to the primitive consonant k. Thus, naturally, the category of voiced consonants is called ghoṣavat ‘with voice,’ indicating that the feature of voice is also looked at as an add-on feature. The sound gh is derived by adding the voiced aspiration h to k. The final nasal of the series, i.e. ṅ, is derived by adding the primitive voiced nasal ṃ (anusvāra) to the primitive consonant k. Thus, the order of these consonants represents the results of prior theoretical considerations which are explicitly discussed in texts like the RPR and the ancient Śikṣā quoted in the CAB (Deshpande 1976). 4.4.4. After these ‘contact’ sounds, the alphabet lists the semi-vowels or ‘in-between-sounds’ (antasthā / antaḥsthā), i.e. y, r, l, and v. At the very end are listed the spirants, ūṣman ‘aspiration sounds,’ i.e. ś, ṣ, s, and h. The semi-vowels, i.e. y, r, l, and v, as well as the three sibilants, i.e. ś, ṣ, and s, also exhibit the back-to-front ordering in terms of the points of articulations of the included sounds. It seems that the phoneticians intended the final h as a separate addition to the first three sibilants. The first three are voiceless sibilants, while the final h, is a voiced aspiration. Most texts also add the sounds ṃ, ḥ, ẖ, and ḫ. Among these sounds, the sounds, ḥ (visarga) is a voiceless h sound. The sounds ḫ (jihvāmūlīya) and ẖ (upadhmānīya) are variants for ḥ, before k, kh, and p, ph, respectively. The nature of the sound represented by ṃ, the anusvāra, is highly debated in the ancient texts. The general consensus is that it is an oral-nasal generic sound which changes to homorganic nasals in accordance with what follows. An unchanged or un- changeable ṃ is found only before the spirants and r. This predominant context of spirants for the anusvāra led some texts like the RPR to include this sound in its list of spirants (ūṣman). Since there was a feeling that an anusvāra could be prolonged in length in recitation, the same text says that an anusvāra may be considered to be either a vowel or a consonant. Most of these texts discuss several other sounds and their features. Besides the ṃ (= anusvāra) which is generally described as an oral-nasal sound, most texts also posit another sound called nāsikya, which is deemed to be a pure nasal sound. Additionally, most texts talk about fractional vowels, such as the ones which go in the make-up of a vowel normally represented as r̥, i.e. ∂r∂. The phonetic treatises also go into details of what are clearly transitional sounds. For instance, the texts talk about a nasal gँ (= η?) intervening between the consonants g and n in a word like agni. Such consonants are called Yamas. The texts also go into details of accents (= pitch variation) and nasalization of vowels, as well as three- and four-moraic vowels. According to these texts,

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 43 one can also get contextual nasal variants for all vowels, and the semi-vowels y, v, and l, i.e. ỹ, ṽ, and l̃. 4.5. Descriptive Techniques & Terminology 4.5.1. The descriptive and the prescriptive goal of the ancient Indian phonetic tradition was to be able to clearly distinguish between different sounds of Sanskrit, so that one will not be mistaken or mispronounced for another. Verse 10 of the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā says: स्वरतः कालतः स्थानात् प्रयत्नानुप्रदानतः । इति वर्णविदः प्राहुर्निपुणं तन्निबोधत ॥ Sounds are distinguished from each other on the basis of accents (svara), time or duration (kāla), point of articulation (sthāna), manner (prayatna), and type of phonation (anupradāna). Here the term svara ‘accent’ refers to the pitch distinctions denoted by the terms udātta ‘high,’ anudātta ‘low,’ and svarita ‘rising-falling.’ The term kāla ‘duration’ refers to units of time it requires to pronounce a given sound. Consonants are generally considered to be of a half-mora (ardha-mātrā) length, while vowels can be of one, two, three and four morae in length. The one-mora vowels are called hrasva ‘short.’ The two-mora vowels are called dīrgha ‘long.’ Vowels with three and four morae length are called pluta ‘prolonged.’ The term sthāna ‘place, point of articulation’ refers to points on the articulatory track, i.e. uras ‘chest,’ kaṇṭha ‘throat,’ jihvāmūla ‘tongue-root,’ tālu ‘hard-palate,’ mūrdhan ‘cerebrum, roof of the oral cavity,’ dantamūla ‘alveolar ridge, root of teeth,’ danta ‘teeth,’ and oṣṭha ‘lips.’ The list of points of articulation sometimes also includes nāsikā ‘nose.’ The term prayatna ‘manner’ refers to how the physical organ called karaṇa ‘articulator’ relates to the point of articulation, i.e. sparśa ‘contact,’ upasaṃhāra ‘approximation,’ vivr̥ta ‘open,’ etc. The term karaṇa ‘articulator’ generally refers to different parts of the tongue, such as the tip, the middle, and the root, as well as the sides or edges and the middle. It also refers to teeth in the case of labio-dental sounds like v, and to the lower lip in the case of labial sounds like b. For nasalized vowels such as ã, ĩ, ũ, ẽ, and õ, the nose is often considered to be the articulator, while for the nasal consonants ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m, the nose is considered to be the point of articulation (Deshpande 1975: 11-12). The texts show a great diversity of opinion on many of these classifications (cf. Allen 1953, Bare 1976). The final category is that of anupradāna ‘phonation, emission.’ Generally, there are two types of emission,

44 INTRODUCTION i.e. śvāsa ‘breath’ and nāda ‘resonance,’ resulting from two different positions of the glottal chords, vivr̥ta ‘open’ and saṃvr̥ta ‘close’ respectively. The emission of the type of breath further results in voiceless sounds, while the emission of the type of resonance further results in vowels and voiced consonants. Some texts like the Taittirīya-Prātiśākhya claim that there is a third type of emission called hakāra ‘the h sound, voiced aspiration’ when the glottal chords are in a position in-between open and close, and this type combines voice or resonance with aspiration and is termed breathy voice in modern phonetics. This type of emission is found in the voiced spirant h, as well as in voiced aspirate stops such as gh, jh, ḍh, dh, and bh. The ancient Indian texts use two different terms, nāda and ghoṣa to refer to voicing. We are often told that the feature of nāda is shared by vowels and ghoṣavat consonants, lit. consonants possessed of ghoṣa, voiced consonants. Modern scholars have debated the question of whether or not this refers to two different types of resonance. Some have suggested that the distinction has no articulatory basis, but that it is phonologically motivated. Others have suggested a possible articulatory basis, namely that the first, i.e. nāda, is produced by the closure of glottal chords, and that the secondary amplification, i.e. ghoṣa, is produced by a closure in the oral chamber created by the contact between the articulator and the point of articulation (cf. Deshpande 1976, Cardona 1983). 4.5.2. Certain features are considered as plus/minus features in ancient Indian phonetics, while others are considered as more/less features. The terms ghoṣavat (voiced) and aghoṣa (voiceless) indicate that the feature of ghoṣa ‘voice’ is a plus/minus feature. On the other hand, the feature of aspiration, especially when designated by the term prāṇa, appears as a more/less feature. The sounds which are called unaspirated in Western ter- minology are called alpaprāṇa ‘with less prāṇa,’ while the aspirated sounds are called mahāprāṇa ‘with greater prāṇa.’ Similarly, the notion of prayatna ‘effort, manner’ is expressed in some texts in binary terms spr̥ṣṭa/aspr̥ṣṭa ‘with or without contact between the articulator and the point of articulation,’ while in other texts, this notion is expressed in terms of degrees of openness and contact i.e. vivr̥ta ‘open,’ īṣadvivr̥ta ‘slightly open,’ vivr̥tatara ‘more open,’ and vivr̥tatama ‘most open,’ spr̥ṣṭa ‘in contact,’ and īṣatspr̥ṣṭa ‘in slight contact.’ 4.6. What is distinctive? 4.6.1. Several scholars have devoted their attention to a possible distinction between phonetics and phonology in the context of the ancient traditions of Sanskrit phonetics and grammar (cf. Deshpande 1975, Bare 1976,

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 45 Cardona 1983). Often the term varṇa is translated with the term ‘phoneme’ in modern expositions of Sanskrit phonetics. The Sanskrit grammarians do indeed discuss minimum pairs like kūpa/sūpa/yūpa. However, the term varṇa does not strictly refer to a phoneme in modern linguistics. For Sanskrit phoneticians, the sounds n and ñ are distinct varṇas, while they would be only allophones for a modern linguist. On the contrary, the sounds a and ā would be separate phonemes for a modern linguist, but they belong to the same varṇa for Sanskrit phoneticians and grammarians. On the other hand, the Sanskrit phoneticians and grammarians do indeed have a notion that certain features of sounds are relevant in some descriptive contexts, while they are not relevant in other contexts. Kātyāyana in his comments on Pāṇini’s grammar often brings up the notion that the features (guṇa, quality) of accent (svara), nasality (ānunāsikya), and duration (kāla) are distinctive (bhedaka), See: Deshpande (1975: 50ff; 203, note 442; 207, note 466). According to the fully developed phonetico-grammatical doctrines of Sanskrit grammarians, the term avarṇa refers to the whole family (e.g. avarṇa-kula) of the following eighteen sounds: a, ā, ā3, á, ā́, ā́3, à, ā̀, ā̀3, ã, ā̃, ā̃3, ã́, ā̃́, ā̃́3, ã̀, ā̃̀, ā̃̀3. 4.6.2. The distinctions of length, accent, and nasality are not relevant for inclusion in a varṇa. On the other hand, the term akāra refers to the six tokens of short a differing in accent and nasality, but not in length. The grammarian-phoneticians knew that in formulating some rules of sandhi, they could achieve maximum descriptive economy by resorting to the varṇa groupings, while for other rules, the -kāra grouping seemed more economical, and for still other rules, one needed to make a highly specific reference to a token with a specific length, nasality, accent etc. The grammarian-phoneticians make several important distinctions in their terminology. For instance, two sound tokens are sarūpa ‘with identical phonetic shape,’ if and only if they have all identical phonetic features, including length, nasality, accents, etc. Two vowel-tokens are grouped in the same x-kāra group, if they have the same point of articulation, articulator, manner, and quantity. They could differ in nasality and accent, and still be part of the same x-kāra group. Two sounds are savarṇa ‘homogeneous’ with each other if they share the same point of articulation and the same manner. These different groupings were used to formulate different rules in Sanskrit grammar, and allowed descriptive optimization. The notion of maximal featural proximity (āntaratamya) is one of the principles used in Sanskrit grammar to determine the choice of a substitute from among a choice of alternatives (cf. Bare 1976, Hueckstedt 1995). 4.6.3. The Sanskrit grammarian-phoneticians were also aware of another distinction, i.e. that of the speed of delivery or tempo, i.e. fast, medium,

46 INTRODUCTION and slow. These modes of recitation are discussed in Kātyāyana’s Vārttikas on Pāṇini 1.1.70 and 1.4.109. Nāgeśabhaṭṭa, in his Uddyota (MB, Vol. I, Pt. I, p. 378) quotes the following verse: अभ्यासार्थे द्रुता वृत्तिः प्रयोगार्थे तु मध्यमा । शिष्याणामुपदेशार्थं वृत्तिरिष्टा विलम्बिता ॥ The verse says that different modes of delivery were considered to be appropriate for different contexts. The fast speed is supposed to be used when a person is reciting the mantras for his own study. In the ritual use of the mantras, one is supposed to use the medium speed. A teacher is supposed to use the slow speed to recite the mantras while teaching his students. Using an inappropriate speed at the wrong occasion creates unacceptable situations, and in this sense, the speed or tempo is a distinctive feature at this level. However, these differences of tempo had no euphonic or grammatical value. This has been clearly recognized by Kātyāyana in his Vārttika: siddhaṃ tv avasthitā varṇā vaktuś cirāciravacanād vr̥ttayo viśiṣyante, MB (Kielhorn edn.), Vol.I, p. 181. Further they noticed that a consonant such as k seemed to acquire a certain degree of voicing in intervocalic positions, but that it was not to be distinguished from the generic k for all practical purposes. 4.6.4. In the work of Bhartr̥hari, the grammarian-philosopher of ± 500 A.D., we find a new representation of these different levels of distinctive- ness. These different levels of distinctiveness are seen in terms of a production model. There is a notion that there are ontologically eternal true sounds (sphoṭa, varṇa) which are temporally manifested by the physical sounds of two kinds, primary physical sounds (prākr̥ta-dhvani) and secondary physical sounds (vaikr̥ta-dhvani). There are several different views found in Bhartr̥hari’s Vākyapadīya and in his commentary on Patañjali’s MB regarding the relationship between the real sounds, the primary physical sounds, and the secondary physical sounds, and these have been ably discussed in detail by S.D. Joshi (1967: 20-34). For our present purpose, suffice it to say that the level of sphoṭa ‘true sound,’ in general, seems to reflect only the features of point of articulation, manner, voicing, aspiration, etc., but not duration or tempo. The sphoṭa level is said to be beyond temporality, while the primary manifesting sounds have the feature of duration or length. The secondary manifesting sounds, which are further reverberations of the primary manifesting sounds, reveal the feature of tempo. Thus, in general, we get concentric circles representing different features. As a production model, I do not think Bhartr̥hari’s ideas will rank very high in the evaluation of modern

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 47 phoneticians. On the other hand, the diagrammatic perception of the various phonetic features as concentric circles moving out from more distinctive to less distinctive offers an interesting view of these features and deserves to be explored further. 5. Phonetics vs Phonology in Indian Grammatical Tradition 5.1. ‘Phonetics’ versus ‘Phonology’ in Modern Linguistics 5.1.1. There are a number of distinctions made explicitly in modern linguistics for which there are no exact parallels in the traditions of Sanskrit Śikṣās, Prātiśākhyas, and Vyākaraṇa. One such distinction is that between the categories of ‘phonetic’ versus ‘phonemic’, or to use a more recent term, ‘phonological’. Both phonetics and phonology, in their various brands and branches as practiced in modern linguistics, represent a study of the sound system of a given language. Without getting into too many technicalities, we can describe the difference between these two allied fields in the following way. Phonetics aims at studying the articulatory and the acoustic processes involved in the production of the sounds used by a given language. The very basic material which is being studied may be called phonic material, i.e. the sounds of a language as they are produced and perceived. The next level of understanding may be reached in what may be called phonemic. At this level, an analyst may be looking for features which are distinctive in some sense. The notion of ‘phoneme’ in structural linguistics attempted to come to grips with this question. There may be two instances of the phonic material which may be different in some respect, and yet may be perceived by both the speaker and the listener as being two instances of the same sound. This kind of an approach leads the analyst to distinguish between differences among the sounds which matter, and the differences which do not matter. Now the whole notion of what matters is a complex notion in itself and later we shall explore this complexity in some detail. At this point, suffice it to say that the traditional notion of ‘phoneme’ dealt with one such level of what matters, and came up with a concept that for a given language, there was a fixed inventory of distinctive sounds. This lead the structural linguists to work on determining such inventories for various languages, and to debate whether a given phone or

48 INTRODUCTION sound-instance was an independent phoneme, or merely an allophone, a contextual variant of a phoneme. Eventually, the emphasis on inventories of phonemes, and the debate on a semi-metaphysical question of whether such phonemes exist, gave way to a study of what came to be known as distinctive features. The sounds came to be viewed as bundles of features, some of which were viewed as being distinctive in some sense. The emphasis on the discovery of phonemes then shifted to the determination of a set of distinctive features for a given language. The next level of understanding of the sounds of a language is reached in a branch of linguistics which is now generally called phonology. In terms of the current state of the science of linguistics, the branch of phonemics is very much dead, while the branches of phonetics and phonology are very much alive and prospering. What does phonology deal with? Phonology deals with the study of relationships between the sounds and features of these sounds as part of a system. It focuses on the behavior of sounds in relation to each other, and investigates the questions of how the behavior of sounds can be described in the form of predictable rules. Such rules may make use of various groupings of sounds, their features etc., and can be formulated at increasingly abstract levels. Phonetics and phonology may be studied both in synchronic as well as diachronic aspects. In both such approaches, one can raise the question of not only ‘how’ the sounds behave, but go further and raise the question of ‘why’ the sounds behave in a particular way. The answer to the question of ‘why’ may then be given in various different ways. For a given pattern of behavior of sounds, the answer may lie in the current phonetic features of those sounds, or such a behavior of sounds may simply reflect an inherited pattern of behavior, not fully justifiable in terms of the current features of the given sounds. This leads to some interesting and important possibilities. It is relatively easy to see that phonological groupings of sounds may be motivated by the phonetic features of the given sounds. However, one cannot discount the possibility and the probability that the phonological behavior of sounds may in some cases lead sounds with originally divergent phonetic features to move closer to a more homogeneous phonetic character. 5.1.2. The tradition of Sanskrit phonetics represented in the Śikṣās, Prātiśākhyas, and Sanskrit Grammars clearly does not have any interest in the historical study of Sanskrit, and hence one cannot find any explicit discussions in this tradition in this regard. At the same time, one need not assume that this tradition has been left untouched by the history of the language itself. Similarly, even though the tradition has no explicit separate terms for what we call phonetics and phonology in modern linguistics, one need not assume that

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 49 the ancient grammarians and phoneticians did not have some of the same concerns. We need to look for what such concerns may have been, and the ways in which such concerns have surfaced in the ancient literature. While we must make every effort to make sure that we are not superimposing a modern set of concepts on the statements of the ancient grammarians, we should leave no stone unturned to find out the distinctions that they made, and the ones which they did not make. A good deal of work has been done in this direction by scholars like George Cardona, Paul Kiparsky, myself, my student James Bare, and more recently by Robert Hueckstedt. In what follows, I shall briefly describe the kind of research which has been going on in this field for the past twenty some years. Many of the details, which I shall report, involve long- standing controversies, though here I shall not proceed in a polemical fashion. 5.2. ‘Varṇa’ versus ‘Phoneme’ 5.2.1. In modern expositions of Sanskrit grammar and phonetics, especially the ones coming from India, there has been a tendency to use the term ‘phoneme’ to render the Sanskrit term varṇa. Whatever the historical origins of the term varṇa, and we shall not deal with that question here, the term has been used with a wide latitude of reference in Sanskrit literature. Perhaps the term varṇa is very much like the English term ‘letter,’ making an oblique reference to the art of writing. The widest possible meaning of the term varṇa is ‘sound, letter.’ In this wide sense, it appears in expressions like varṇa-samāmnāya, where it seems to be identical in meaning with the term akṣara, cf. akṣara-samāmnāya. If the term varṇa refers to sounds listed in the traditional Sanskrit alphabet, including the often unlisted sounds (ayogavāhas), e.g. ṃ and ḥ, can this use of the term varṇa be identical in meaning with the sense of the term ‘phoneme’ in structural linguistics? Most of the sounds listed in the Sanskrit alphabet do qualify for the term ‘phoneme,’ but not all. In order that a sound should qualify for the term ‘phoneme,’ we must have minimal pairs of words which differ in just one sound. Patañjali’s kūpa / sūpa / yūpa analysis does look similar to the analysis with minimal pairs in structural linguistics. However, the fact is that for sounds like ḥ, ṅ, ñ, ḫ, and ẖ, we cannot find minimal pairs in Sanskrit. For example, we have the pair bhāna / bhāṇa, where the change of just one sound produces another word with a distinct meaning. Through analysis like this, we can conclude that the Sanskrit alphabet includes some varṇas which are not phonemes, but are allophones in modern terminology. Why were such sounds considered to be varṇas? Here, the distinctive background of the Sanskrit phonetic tradition must be fully

50 INTRODUCTION appreciated. There seem to be two possible reasons for treating a sound like ñ to be a separate varṇa. The first reason seems to be that the distinction of allophones versus phonemes is foreign to the Indian tradition. The Indian tradition was also a prayoga-śāstra ‘a science of performance,’ and obviously it did desire that a reciter should pronounce ñ, where it was required, and should not mispronounce it as n, or ṇ. Even if there are no minimal pairs for ñ, every Vaidika knows that ñ must be distinguished from other sounds in recitation. Secondly, the phoneme-allophone analysis applies when we are taking into account only one language at a time. Several Śikṣās, including the more popular Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (v. 3), say: त्रिषष्टिः चतुःषष्टिर्वा वर्णाः शम्भुमते मताः । संस्कृते प्राकृते चापि ।, “In the opinion of Śiva, there are 63 or 64 sounds in Sanskrit as well as in Prakrit.” Besides the initial uncertainty about the exact number of varṇas, the verse clearly points out that these are the varṇas for both Sanskrit and Prakrit together. In Prakrit we can find minimal pairs involving ñ, e.g. ñāṇa versus nāṇa(ka). Such a pair may make ñ a legitimate phoneme for Prakrit. For Indian phoneticians, ñ was simply distinct from n, ṇ, and ṅ. Thus, the notion of phoneme must be distinguished from that of varṇa. We must appreciate the similarities as well as the differences. 5.3. ‘Varṇa,’ ‘Varga,’ and ‘Savarṇa’ 5.3.1. Now we can move to a narrower, and a more technical usage of the word varṇa. In this narrow usage, the word -varṇa is distinguished from -kāra. The word varṇa, when affixed to a short vowel, e.g. i-varṇa, stands for the whole class of i-sounds differing in length, accents, and nasality. Patañjali uses the term a-varṇa-kula for such a class. Thus, there is a-varṇa, but not ā- varṇa, ai-varṇa, ka-varṇa, or ya-varṇa. Instead of these, we have ā-kāra, ai- kāra, ka-kāra, and ya-kāra. The term a-kāra is also a generalization in that it refers to varieties of short a, which may differ in accent and nasality. For the groups of stops, one could not use the term varṇa, but one called the group of k, kh, g, gh, and ṅ, by the term ka-varga. In older works like the Śikṣās and the Prātiśākhyas, membership within a varṇa-group, or a varga-group was generally defined simply by listing the sounds, cf. द्वे द्वे सवर्णे ह्रस्वदीर्घे, TPR (1.3), also: Deshpande (1975: 85ff). This is generally the meaning of the term savarṇa in the Śikṣās and the Prātiśākhyas, i.e. these sounds belong to the same varṇa. The term kavarga was defined by just picking out the first item of the list and saying: this is the k- class.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 51 5.4. From Definitions by Listing to Featural Definitions 5.4.1. As we move from the Śikṣās and the Prātiśākhyas to Pāṇini, we see a qualitative difference in the way the groupings of sounds are defined. Here, there are two modes of defining groups. The first way is to make shortforms (pratyāhāras) based on the listings in the Śivasūtras. The second way is to access members of a group through the procedure called savarṇagrahaṇa ‘accessing a class of savarṇas by referring to a single token.’ While the Śikṣās and the Prātiśākhyas defined the phonetic features of Sanskrit sounds, it was Pāṇini who showed a superior ability to define groupings of sounds in terms of their phonetic features. This is how his definition of savarṇa differs significantly from the definitions found in most of the Prātiśākhyas: P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्). The rule says that any two sounds are called savarṇas of each other if and only if they share the same āsya- prayatna ‘oral effort.’ The term āsyaprayatna was eventually interpreted as referring to two features: sthāna ‘place of articulation’ and ābhyantara-prayatna ‘internal effort,’ i.e. the manner in which the karaṇa or the articulator was related to the place of articulation.’ Pāṇini himself did not specify the phonetic categories he had in mind, although the later Pāṇinian commentators have provided those details for us. Here we shall not go into the question of whether the later Pāṇinian tradition has given us historically reliable phonetic classifications for Pāṇini. In any case, this single generalization in Pāṇini covered the two separate notions in the Prātiśākhyas, i.e. savarṇa and savarga. Once this was accomplished, Pāṇini introduced his general and limited procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa through his rules P.1.1.69 (अणुदित् सवर्णस्य चाप्रत्ययः) and P.1.1.70 (तपरस्तत्कालस्य). In terms of the progress of linguistic theory, this indeed marked an advance. 5.5. Problems of the New Phonology in Pāṇini 5.5.1. The new featural definition of savarṇa in Pāṇini, and the procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa, achieved new theoretical success, and yet in the wake of this success, it brought with it new problems, which the Prātiśākhyas were generally not faced with. I shall mention here two such problems. The phonetic features assumed by Pāṇini were such that the vowels and the spirants (ś, ṣ, s, and h) had the same prayatna, i.e. the degree of closure or openness between the articulator and the place of articulation. This would have made some vowels savarṇas of some consonants, and the procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa would have allowed a vowel to stand for its consonantal

52 INTRODUCTION savarṇa. Pāṇini did recognize the possibility of such undesired over-extension of the notion of savarṇa, and to prevent it, he formulated his rule P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ). In general terms, the rule is supposed to say that vowels cannot be savarṇas with consonants. This shows the limitations of featural groupings for functional purposes. In spite of the common phonetic features, vowels and consonants must be grouped apart from each other. On the other hand, consider the opposite problem with a and ā. Traditionally, ā was described as an open (vivr̥ta) sound, while a was described as a close (saṃvr̥ta) sound. Thus, their prayatna being different from each other, they would not become savarṇas of each other, and then they cannot be grouped together. To get over this problem, Pāṇini apparently pronounced an open short a throughout his grammar, which was restored to a close short a by the last rule of his grammar, i.e. P.8.4.68 (अ अ). This made these two sounds technically savarṇas of each other throughout his grammar, and only the very last rule, invisible to the rest of the grammar, restored it to its true pronunciation. There is a moral to this story. Sounds with common phonetic features can have a different functional load, and sounds with different phonetic features may have the same functional load. This same result has been achieved by some texts by using terms like savarṇavat. In the later Pāṇinian tradition, the sounds r̥ and l̥ were legislated to be each other’s savarṇas in spite of the difference in their phonetic features (cf. Vārttika 4 on P. 1.1.10: ऋकारऌकारयोः सवर्णविधिः). 5.6. Varṇarūpa versus Varṇākr̥ti: From Phonetic Features to Metaphysics 5.6.1. If the difference between the Śikṣās and Prātiśākhyas3 on the one hand and Pāṇini on the other can be caracterized as a move from groupings by listing to groupings by features, especially in the context of the notion of savarṇa, the difference between Pāṇini and Kātyāyana may be characterized as a move from featural phonology to metaphysical phonology. To describe this move briefly, we can say that for Pāṇini, the sounds listed in the Śivasūtras stand for themselves to begin with, and they stand for their savarṇa class only as a result of the procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa. As we have seen before, membership to the class of savarṇa is controlled by the featural definition of the class given by P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्). Where the procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa does not apply, the given sound stands just for itself. The basic notion of a sound standing for ‘itself’ is expressed by Pāṇini through the

3 This is a broad generalization about this literature, and has specific exceptions which may be post-Paninian, e.g. the Vājasaneyi-Prātiśākhya.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 53 term rūpa ‘phonetic shape’ of a sound, and this notion has been incorporated in expressions like sarūpa, asarūpa, and in the fundamental rule P.1.1.68 (स्वं रूपं शब्दस्याशब्दसंज्ञा). Thus, the form of a word is basically viewed by Pāṇini in terms of its phonetic shape. Moving away from this featural phonology of Pāṇini, Kātyāyana, perhaps under the influence of the emerging philosophical schools such as those of Vājapyāyana and Vyāḍi, proposes a new brand of metaphysical phonology. This proposal says that one should assume that the listing of the Śivasūtras is not a listing of tokens, but a listing of sound-genera or ākr̥tis, which would naturally represent a whole class sharing a given ākr̥ti, without any special rules. If such is the case, then one does not need a large part of the Pāṇinian procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa: Vt. सवर्णेऽण्ग्रहणमपरिभाष्य- माकृतिग्रहणात्, on P.1.1.69. This proposal of Kātyāyana, which I have dis- cussed at length in Deshpande (1975: 17-31), is fraught with difficulties. I shall briefly mention the following: 1) A metaphysical definition of ākr̥ti of a sound becomes impression- istic in terms of one’s ability to identify its membership. 2) Generally any member covered by an ākr̥ti would be able to stand for the whole class. This obliterates the distinction between sounds directly listed in the Śivasūtras, i.e. the aṆ sounds, and the sounds not directly listed in the Śivasūtras, i.e. the non-aṆ sounds. 3) The procedure of ākr̥tigrahaṇa cannot completely replace the Pāṇinian procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa. This is so, because the ākr̥ti of i can cover ī, but the ākr̥ti of k does not cover kh, g, gh, and ṅ. This is admitted by Kātyāyana, who suggests that even after accepting the procedure of ākr̥tigrahaṇa, one would still need the procedure of savarṇagrahaṇa to cover these vargas of consonants. Thus, in general the metaphysical phonology proposed by Kātyāyana has been relatively ineffective and in the later Pāṇinian tradition, there are few supporters for it. 5.7. Phonetics versus Behavior: The Case of Sandhyakṣaras 5.7.1. The treatment of the Sanskrit sandhyakṣaras in the Indian tradition is illustrative of several other important points. The sounds e, o, ai,

54 INTRODUCTION and au are all generally called sandhyakṣaras in Sanskrit texts, implying that the tradition views them as composit sounds in some sense. However, very few texts suggest that all these sounds have distinct components. Generally, the older texts treat the sounds e and o as monophthongs, and ascribe a single point of articulation to these sounds, even while treating them as sandhy- akṣaras. On the other hand, all texts treat the sounds ai and au as diphthongs. The older texts explicitly call these sounds dvivarṇa ‘consisting of two sounds,’ and ascribe to them two points of articulation. However, at the same time, these older texts are quick to point out that for all practical purposes these sounds, i.e. ai and au, are to be treated as if they are single sounds (CA 1.1.40: सन्ध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्टवर्णान्येकवर्णवद् वृत्तिः). These sounds behave as if they are single sounds. They do not constitute two syllables either for metrical or grammatical purposes, and phonologically behave as long vowels, rather than as sequences of short vowels. This phonological behavior of these two diphthongs as monophthongs has sometimes clouded even the supposedly phonetic description of these sounds. Several texts tell us that the sounds e and o are vivr̥tatara, the sounds ai and au are vivr̥tatama, and the sound ā is still more open. If the sounds ai and au are phonetically dvivarṇa sounds, it makes no sense to say that they are even more open than e and o. To my mind, the above statement reflects a confusion caused by the lack of proper discrimination between the phonetic and the phonological levels, and the superimposition of one level upon the other. We shall later look at some other cases where the phonological behavior may have colored the phonetic classifications in Sanskrit texts. 5.8. Sthāna versus Karaṇa: The Case of V 5.8.1. The featural phonology brings with it the responsibility to explicitly define and specify a finite set of phonetic features for the sounds of a language. Any lack of clarity in the description of the phonological system in this regard can lead to problems which were not faced by those who practiced groupings by listing. As an example, consider the case of the sound v. Most of the older Śikṣās and Prātiśākhyas list v among the oṣṭhya ‘labial’ sounds without any further comment. These texts must be distinguished from those texts which further specify that the karaṇa ‘articulator’ for v is the ‘tips of teeth’ (cf. VPR 1.81). If the teeth or their tips are only a karaṇa for v, we can still consider v to be an oṣṭhya sound, since such terms as oṣṭhya are seen as always referring to the point of articulation and not the articulator. The texts which come still later, such as the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā say that v is a

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 55 dantyoṣṭhya sound. Since many of these late texts pay little attention to the notion of karaṇa, the subsequent tradition has interpreted this term to mean that the sound v has two points of articulation. This sound is dantya as well as oṣṭhya, and, therefore, it should be included in both categories. What was Pāṇini’s own intention? He has remained silent on the details of the phonetic features, and has left it to his successors to worry about the problems caused by his silence. Consider, for instance, the rule P.7.3.73 (लुग्वा दुहदिहलिहगुहा- मात्मनेपदे दन्त्ये). The rule says that after the listed roots, the affix -ksa- of the aorist is optionally (or preferably, if one accepts Kiparsky’s interpretation of vā) deleted before a middle termination beginning in a dantya sound. The affixes -dhvam and -ta are undoubtedly dantya-initial affixes. However, the affix -vahi raises doubts. Is it a dantya-initial affix, or is it not? If the teeth functioned only as karaṇa for v, then it is not a dantya sound, since the term dantya should properly refer only to the point of articulation. However, the KV, relying upon the late phonetic texts says that since v is a dantyoṣṭha sound, it must be included among dantya sounds, as well as among oṣṭhya sounds (cf. दन्त्योष्ठ्योऽपि वकारो दन्त्य इति गृह्यते, KV on P.7.3.73). This leads to the derivation of forms like aduhvahi, as well as adhukṣāvahi. Whether this statement is historically accurate is a major question. This question has been debated elsewhere in detail, cf. Cardona 1964, Deshpande 1975a and 1981. Suffice it to say that the choice of going for featural phonology requires a degree of precision which is sometimes lacking in the Sanskrit texts, and this lack of precision may have contributed to a certain degree of confusion. Similar confusion is also noticeable on the exact status of nāsikā ‘nose.’ 5.9. Āntaratamya versus Yathāsaṃkhya: The Case of iko yaṇ aci 5.9.1. In the last several years, a major discussion has taken place among scholars such as myself, George Cardona, and recently, Robert Hueckstedt. This question revolves around the use of the principle of āntaratamya ‘maximal featural proximity’ stated in P.1.1.50 (स्थानेऽन्तरतमः) versus the principle of yathāsaṃkhya ‘one-to-one substitution’ stated in P.1.3.10 (यथासंख्यमनुदेशः समानाम्) in deciding appropriate substitutions in some rules of Pāṇini. There are cases of substitution like P.3.4.101 (तस्थस्थमिपां तान्तन्तामः) where it is beyond doubt that the substitution must be made on the basis of yathāsaṃkhya. This rule says that tas, thas, tha, and miP are replaced by tām, tam, ta and am, respectively. Similarly, there are cases like P.8.4.53 (झलां जश् झशि), where we must apply the principle of maximal featural

56 INTRODUCTION proximity or āntaratamya. This rule says that jhaL sounds are replaced with jaŚ sounds, before jhaŚ sounds. The group referred to by jhaL includes the consonants jh, bh, gh, ḍh, dh, kh, ph, ch, ṭh, th, c, ṭ, t, k, p, ś, ṣ, s and h. On the other hand, the substitutes denoted by the shortform jaŚ include j, b, g, ḍ and d. The unequal number of originals and substitutes makes it an ideal candidate for the application of the principle of maximal featural proximity. However, rules like P.6.1.77 (इको यणचि) raise difficult questions. Here, the originals are denoted by the shortform iK, while the substitutes are denoted by yaṆ. hese shortforms are expanded just to i, u, r̥, l̥, and y, v, r, l, respectively, then one can think of the possibility of one-to-one substitution. However, in order to make sure that the rule would also apply to the change of ī to y , one must expand the list of originals to cover all the homogeneous varieties of i, u, r̥ and l̥, by P.1.1.69 (अणुदित्सवर्णस्य चाप्रत्ययः). If this is done before effecting the substitution, then one gets unequal numbers of originals and substitutes, and one needs to use the principle of maximal featural prox- imity. On P.1.1.50, Patañjali (MB, Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., p. 10) says that the problems of P.6.1.77 can be resolved even with yathāsaṃkhya : संख्यातानु- देशेनाप्येतत्सिद्धम्. However, on P.1.3.10 (यथासंख्यमनुदेशः समानाम्), he says (MB, Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., p. 267) that the problems of P.6.1.77 can be resolved even with āntaratamya : स्थानेऽन्तरतमेनाप्येतत्सिद्धम्. Are there four originals and four substitutes, or is the number of original and substitutes different? This depends upon when exactly we apply savarṇagrahaṇa to ik and yaṇ. Recently, Robert Hueckstedt has published a monograph that reviews the long traditional debate relating to the interpretation of P.6.1.77, and I believe the final conclusion regarding Pāṇini’s own intention, if there is one, is still elusive. This example demonstrates that in using listings and features, Pāṇinian grammar at times lacks sufficient clarity, and this has lead to such as-yet- unresolved problems. 5.10. Did Phonology influence Phonetics? The Case of r̥ and r. 5.10.1. Earlier I have mentioned the case of ai and au which are simultaneously described as being dvivarṇa ‘composed of two constituent sounds,’ and yet being vivr̥tatama, i.e. even more open that e and o. In my view, this situation has occurred either because these sounds are phonetically diphthongs, but phonologically behave as single sounds, or because the conception of these sounds as dvivarṇa is the inherited doctrine, while, at least dialectally, these sounds have been reduced to monophthongal pronunciation

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 57 similar to vowels in the English words at and all. Since the levels of phonetics and phonology were not sufficiently distinguished, the statements in the texts leave room for speculation. Such discrepancies are also found as regards the sounds r and r̥. The older texts generally consider r̥ as a jihvāmūlīya ‘velar’ sound, and r as a dantamūlīya ‘alveolar’ sound. The undoubtedly retroflex sounds are ṣ, and the ṭavarga. However, notice the fact that the same old texts also specify that a dental n coming after r, r̥, or ṣ is retroflexed. This would seem to show that a dantamūlīya ‘alveolar,’ a jihvāmūlīya ‘velar,’ and a mūrdhanya ‘retroflex’ have the same phonological function, i.e. they are cerebralizers, though not all cerebrals themselves. Perhaps such a statement was gradually viewed as being inappropriate, and the later texts started calling r and r̥ also mūrdhanya ‘retroflex’ sounds. Most modern scholars still wonder how these sounds can be phonetically retroflex. It is thus possible that in this case the phonological behavior of sounds has led the ancient phoneticians and grammarians to reclassify the phonetic categories of the concerned sounds to remove the seeming inconsistencies. Such may also be the case of the oral effort for vowels and spirants. Most ancient works, including Pāṇini, seem to hold that vowels and spirants are all vivr̥ta ‘open.’ Precisely for this reason, Pāṇini had to formulate his rule P.1.1.10 (nājjhalau) to prevent the impending sāvarṇya ‘homogeneity’ between vowels and spirants. This rule, to say the least, has created enormous problems of interpretation. To get over these, Patañjali, among others, proposed to differentiate the oral effort for vowels from that of the spirants. The vowels were now classified as ‘open’ (vivr̥ta), while the spirants were classified as ‘slightly open’ (īṣad-vivr̥ta). Whether such a distinction is phonetically justified is not clear. However, this distinction certainly made the phonological statements clearer, and seems to have been greeted with joy by the later grammarians, even at the cost of having to sacrifice P.1.1.10 (nājjhalau), cf. Nāgeśabhaṭṭa’s statement: यदि तु सूत्रवृत्त्यादिषु श्रद्धाजाड्यमपहाय प्रयत्नभेदादेवैतद्व्यावर्त्त्य- सावर्ण्यादीनां न सावर्ण्यमित्युच्यते, तदा सन्तु सप्त प्रयत्नाः, मास्तु च नाज्झलाविति सूत्रम् ।, Br̥hacchabdenduśekhara, vol. I., p. 48. “If, however, having set aside the inertia caused by one’s trust in the Sūtras, commentaries etc., one can say that there is no homogeneity [between sounds like i and ś], whose homo- geneity P.1.1.10 aims to prohibit, on the basis of a difference in

58 INTRODUCTION their articulatory effort, then, [by all means], let there be seven [distinct] articulatory efforts, and let there not be the rule P.1.1.10. 5.11. Nāda versus Ghoṣa: Phonetic and/or Phonological? 5.11.1. Another such debate which has kept modern scholars busy revolves around the terms nāda and ghoṣa. Most ancient texts clearly define nāda as a type of phonation produced when the glottal chords are closed. The vibration produced by the closed glottal chords is called nāda. All voiced sounds have it, including vowels and voiced consonants. Now consider the term ghoṣa. Hardly any text defines how ghoṣa is produced. However, they all use the terms ghoṣavat, ghoṣin, and aghoṣa, implying at the very least that ghoṣa is a certain feature which some sounds have, and others do not. What complicates the debate is the fact that most older texts say that nāda is the phonation for vowels and ghoṣavat consonants. This possibly suggests that ghoṣa is a feature only for some consonants, but not for vowels. 5.11.2. This last statement is the beginning of the whole controversy. Some scholars have followed up the above conclusion and have attempted to identify what ghoṣa as a separate voicing feature may have meant, cf. Desh- pande (1976). Cardona (1986) has argued for a different view. I cannot do justice to his extensive treatment of this question here, but to state his conclu- sion in his own words (p. 79-80): “Though ghoṣavat (‘voiced’) and aghoṣa (‘voiceless’) might at first blush seem to be purely phonetic class names, the use of these terms with reference to voiced and voiceless consonants alone is based on a phonological distinction.” 5.11.3. I tend to believe that for the ancient phoneticians, ghoṣa was also a phonetic term, which may then have had phonological uses as pointed out by Cardona. Whether modern phonetics can identify two types or degrees of voicing need not decide whether the ancient phoneticians viewed ghoṣa to be a phonetic feature of sound, cf. RPR 13.15 (आहुर्घोषं घोषवतामकारमेकेऽनुस्वार- मनुनासिकानाम्), RPR 13.18 (अत्रोत्पन्नावपर ऊष्मघोषौ) and the ancient Śikṣā quoted by the CAB on CA (1.1.12). Such texts lead one to believe that the ancient phoneticians and grammarians did indeed view ghoṣa as a varṇaguṇa which some sounds have and others do not. Such a view is supported by the lists of prayatnas or varṇaguṇas in various texts. Uvaṭa on RPR (13.21) lists ghoṣatā and aghoṣatā as varṇaguṇas ‘features of sound.’ The grammatical texts in the Pāṇinian tradition also list ghoṣa and aghoṣa among the bāhya-prayatnas, besides nāda and śvāsa, and suggest that in their opinion these are phonetic

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 59 features. If one says that nāda and ghoṣa are distinct phonological features with no distinct phonetic reality, then one could perhaps say that a lack of clarity between the levels of phonetics and phonology may have led the Sanskrit tradition to come up with pseudo-phonetic features in some cases. On the other hand, this offers us an opportunity to investigate a possible distinction in the kind of voicing involved in the articulation of vowels and voiced consonants. I have suggested that ghoṣa may possibly refer to the amplification or perhaps friction added to the original voicing caused by the glottal closure in the pronunciation of voiced consonants. Such an added amplification or friction can be attributed to the partial or complete closure of the oral organs in the utterance of voiced consonants. For example, the implosion for unreleased voiced stops like b feels like a form of oral vibration distinct from the vibration of the glottal chords, and it may have been interpreted by the ancient phoneticians as the feature of ghoṣa, distinct from nāda ‘vibration of the glottal chords.’ Also see: Ralf Stautzebach 1994: 287. 5.12. No explicit ‘phonology’ versus ‘phonetics’ 5.12.1. To reiterate my main point, the Sanskrit phonetic and gram- matical traditions did not explicitly distinguish between the phonetic and the phonological levels in their description. However, it is clear that they were faced with many dilemmas in trying to correlate the phonetic features of sounds to their phonological behavior. In doing so, sometimes they made explicit distinctions between what we would call the phonetic character of a sound and its phonological behavior. At other times, the phonological behavior of sounds may have led the ancient grammarians into consciously or unconsciously creating pseudo-phonetic distinctions to match the observed differences in phonological behavior. In any case, the above analysis shows the promise as well as the limitations of the science of phonetics and grammar as practiced in ancient India. 6.Pāṇinian Impact on the Tradition of the CA 6.1. Surya Kanta’s Proposal concerning two types of Prātiśākhyas 6.1.1. In the introduction to his magnificent edition of the APR (p. 24), Surya Kanta proposed that the evolution of the Prātiśākhya literature

60 INTRODUCTION shows that in their formative period, there were essentially two types of Prātiśākhyas. Type A, represented by the APR, contained exhaustive listings (gaṇas) of examples showing certain patterns of linguistic behavior, but no generalized rules. This was the first step. Type B, represented by the CA, containing generalizations, exceptions to generalizations etc., but not exhaustive lists (gaṇas). This was the second step. Surya Kanta (ibid, p. 25) claims that “the evolution of B would throw into abeyance A”, and that “B being descriptive would be easily reduced to the abstract sūtra style.” 6.2. Surya Kanta’s view of the existing Prātiśākhya texts 6.2.1. We shall briefly summarize below, Surya Kanta’s more exten- sive discussion (ibid, pp. 25ff): a) Existing Prātiśākhyas represent a mixture of the types A and B, and there are no pure representatives of the types A and B. b) Surya Kanta assumes that the type A is inherently earlier than the type B, i.e. the listings of instances were made prior to the stage of generalizations. However, on the basis of direct quotations of the CA rules in the APR, he admits that the CA is older than the APR. Thus, an actual text showing generalizations is older than the text which is primarily a set of listings. In actuality, listings are dependent on generaliza- tions, and generalizations are dependent upon listings. 6.3. Vedic grammar and the grammar of contemporary Sanskrit 6.3.1. We may observe that even the Padapāṭhas presuppose a set of grammatical generalizations, on the basis of which the original Saṃhitā was segmented into Padas, and occasionally into their components. The gram- matical theory, though not clearly spelled out by the Padakāras must be

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 61 assumed to have existed, and can be inferred to a certain extent from the Padapāṭhas, cf. V.N. Jha (1987). The ancient Padapāṭha/Prātiśākhya type grammars worked under two different pressures or had two slightly divergent targets: i) narrow target = to describe just the text of a particular Śākhā of a particular Veda ii) wider target = to describe the generic Sanskrit language: Vedic and post-Vedic Sanskrit taken together. Even the Padapāṭha manifests features of post-Vedic dialects of San- skrit like those of Śākalya and others, cf. Cardona (1991), and is not free from the implicit influence of the grammar of contemporary Sanskrit. The narrow target of describing the texts of a particular Śākhā, in practice could not be separated from considerations of post-Vedic Sanskrit, and the concerns of a generalized grammar of Sanskrit at large. The Vedic texts were maintained orally by Brahmins who used the more contemporary forms of Sanskrit in their academic and ritual activity, and hence the existence of the Vedic texts was fully circumscribed by the use of the contemporary forms of Sanskrit. Secondly, the recitational segmentations and recombinations often created sequences which were not strictly speaking Vedic, and these were more directly subject to the rules of the contemporary usage of Sanskrit. This is the case, for instance, when Śākalya adds the word iti after certain forms in the Padapāṭha, or when the words are reversed in their order in the Jaṭāpāṭha, i.e. a+b+b+a+a+b. This phenomenon of active recitational switching between Vedic grammar and the grammar of contemporary Sanskrit is discussed in my paper “Grammars and Grammar-Switching in Vedic Recitational Variations,” (Deshpande, 1994). Thus, one may not necessarily assume that there ever existed grammatical texts, some precursors of our Prātiśākhyas, which were strictly related to the facts of a particular Śākhā, and were not at all influenced by or concerned with the general grammar of contemporary Sanskrit. 6.4. The Perceived Role of General Grammar in Relation to Prātiśākhyas 6.4.1. Patañjali indeed asserts that the Padakāras should follow the Grammarians, and the Grammarians should not follow the Padakāras (न लक्षणेन पदकारा अनुवर्त्त्याः, पदकारैर्नाम लक्षणमनुवर्त्त्यम्, MB, Kielhorn edn., Vol.II., p. 85).

62 INTRODUCTION The Prātiśākhya tradition as we know it does seem to accept a view that its specifications are to be understood on the background of a general grammar of Sanskrit. This is seen from the following discussions 6.4.2. Consider CA 1.1.3-4 (एवमिहेति च विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये). The com- mentary CAB on this rule says: एवमिहेति च । अस्यां शाखायां तत्प्रातिज्ञं मन्यन्ते । ‘यरोऽनुनासिकेऽ- नुनासिको वा’ (पा.८.४.४५) इति विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये । किं सामान्यम् । व्याकरणम् । वक्ष्यति ‘उत्तमा उत्तमेषु’ (च.आ. २.१.५) इति । “[On] thus it is in this [branch]. In this branch, such is con- sidered to be the [specific, non-optional] doctrine. In the generic [grammar of Sanskrit], namely in P.8.4.45, [the proce- dure of changing a stop to its corresponding nasal, before a nasal] obtains optionally. What is the generic description? This is the tradition of grammar. [The CA] will state [its own specific, i.e. non-optional, procedure] in 2.1.5.” This suggests the relation between a general grammar of Sanskrit and a Prātiśākhya as that between a generic description of a language comprising all its dialectal and temporal manifestations and a specific description of a specific text. The general grammar of Sanskrit had to introduce a number of options, due to its goal of describing the large variety of linguistic phenomena under its coverage, cf. सर्ववेदपारिषदं हीदं शास्त्रं तत्र नैकः पन्थाः शक्य आस्थातुम्, MB on P.2.1.58 and P.6.3.14, “Indeed this science [of grammar] is concerned with all Vedic traditions [taken together], and hence it is not possible to choose a unique [= non-optional] path [of description, which would apply only to a specific Vedic branch].” On the other hand, the Prātiśākhya literature relates to us the specific choices made by a specific textual tradition. 6.4.3. Uvaṭa, in his introductory commentary on the first Paṭala of the R̥gveda-Prātiśākhya, discusses this relationship at length. He presents two opposing views. Some claimed that the Prātiśākhyas are statements of ex- ceptions to the rules of a general grammar of Sanskrit, while others claimed them to be independent treatises. Finally, Uvaṭa says: अनयोः पक्षयोर्यतरः पक्षः श्रेयांस्ततरो ग्रहीतव्यः, RPR, Vol.II., p. 23, “Of these two views, one may choose the one which is deemed to be beneficial”. However, he has paid greater attention to the first alternative, namely that the relationship of a Prātiśākhya to a general grammar of Sanskrit is that of a specific description to a generic description. He says (RPR, Vol.II., pp. 21-23):

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 63 शिक्षाच्छन्दोव्याकरणैः सामान्येनोक्तलक्षणम् । तदेवमिह शाखायामिति शास्त्रप्रयोजनम् । प्रातिशाख्यप्रयोजनमनेन श्लोकेनोच्यते । शिक्षादिभिर्यत्सामान्येनोत्सर्र्गेेणोक्तं लक्षणं, यथा तावच्छिक्षायां - ‘स्युर्मूर्धन्या ऋटुरषाः’ - सामान्येन सर्व- शाखासु रेफो मूर्धन्य इत्युक्तः । … एवं सर्वा शिक्षा वर्णेषु स्थानकरणानु- प्रदानादि सर्वासु शाखासु विदधाति; न तु नियमतः कस्यां शाखायां रेफो मूर्धन्यः कस्यां दन्तमूलीय इति । अत एतद्व्यवस्थापकमारभ्यते । … तथा व्याकरणे यत्सामान्येन, यथा ‘ऋचि तुनुघमक्षुतङ्कुत्रोरुष्याणाम्’ (पा. ६.१.१३३) इति । तद् व्यवस्थापयितुमिदमारभ्यते । न सर्वत्रैतानि पदान्यस्यां शाखायां दीर्घाणि भवन्ति । एवं शिक्षाच्छन्दोव्याकरणैर्यत्सर्वासु शाखासु सामान्येन लक्षणमुच्यते तदेवास्यां शाखायामनेन व्यवस्थाप्यते इत्येतत्प्रयोजनमस्याङ्गस्य । तथा चाथर्वणप्रातिशाख्ये इदमेव प्रयोजनमुक्तम् ‘एवमिहेति च विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्येन’ । अस्य सूत्रस्यायमर्थः - सामान्येन लक्षणेन यद् विकल्पप्राप्तं तदेवमस्यां शाखायां व्यवस्थितं भवतीति प्राति- शाख्यप्रयोजनमुक्तम् । “The purpose of [this] science [of the Prātiśākhya] is [to clarify] that the rules which are generically expressed in the Śikṣās, metrics (chandas) and grammars are [effective] in this branch in a restricted manner. This verse elucidates the purpose of a Prātiśākhya. The rules are stated generically in the Śikṣās and other texts. For example, in the Śikṣā statement ‘r̥, ṭ-series, r and ṣ should be cerebral,’ the sound r is generically said to be a cerebral sound in all Vedic traditions. Thus, all the Śikṣās generically prescribe the points of articulation, articulators, phonation etc. for sounds with reference to all Vedic branches, but they do not specifically say in which branch the sound r is invariably cerebral, and where it is [invariably] alveolar. Therefore, this [science of the Prātiśākhya] is undertaken to settle such [questions]. Similarly, the grammar makes generic statements, for example P.6.1.133. This [Prātiśākhya] is undertaken to settle this question. The words [listed in P.6.1.133, i.e. tu, nu, gha etc.] are consistently free from lengthening in this entire textual tradition [of the RV]. Thus, the rules which are generically stated by the Śikṣās, metrics, and grammars, indifferently with respect to all Vedic branches, are specifically settled by this [Prātiśākhya] with respect to this particular Vedic branch. This is the purpose of this ancillary tradition. The same purpose is expressed in the Prātiśākhya of the Atharvaveda [= CA] in rules CA (1.1.3-4). Such is the

64 INTRODUCTION significance of this rule: Whatever [procedure] obtains optionally through generic descriptions is settled in a restrictive way in this Vedic branch. This way the purpose of the Prātiśākhya is explained.” 6.4.4. On VPR (6.24: परोपापावप्रतिपर्यन्वप्यत्यध्याङ्प्रसन्निर्दुरुन्निविस्वभि), which provides a list of Upasargas, Uvaṭa’s commentary says: एते विंशतिरुपसर्गाः प्रकृतिस्वरा भवन्ति ।… प्रकृतिस्वरस्तु व्याकरण- पठितोऽत्र गृह्यते । तथा च तत् सूत्रम् - ‘निपाता आद्युदात्ताः,’ ‘उपसर्गा- श्चाभिवर्जम्’ इति । “These twenty upasargas [as listed in VPR 6.24] retain their natural accent. The natural accent as stated in the grammar is taken for granted in this tradition. Thus, there are the [follow- ing] grammatical rules: ‘The nipātas have their first syllable high-pitched. So do the upasargas, except abhi.’” Anantabhaṭṭa’s commentary on the VPR also repeats the same Sūtras of some Vyākaraṇa. These rules are not found in Pāṇini’s grammar, but are found in the Phiṭsūtras (80, 81) ascribed to Śāntanava. In any case, the dis- cussion assumes that the Prātiśākhyas take for granted the prescriptions of the general grammar of Sanskrit. 6.4.5. The commentary Vaidikābharaṇa by Gopālayajvan on TPR uses the word mūlaśāstra “original science” for Pāṇini’s rules (cf., on TPR 5.14, 5.33, 7.16, 9.10, 10.9, 11.1, 13.4, 14.4) and views the rules of the TPR as statements of exceptions applicable exclusively to the text of the TS. The TPR (19.5: न पूर्वशास्त्रे न पूर्वशास्त्रे) makes a reference to a pūrvaśāstra, a prior grammatical system, and again Gopālayajvan says: अस्य शास्त्रस्य मूलभूतं व्याक- रणं पूर्वशास्त्रमित्युच्यते, “The tradition of grammar which forms the basis of this science [of the Prātiśākhya] is referred to as a prior [= foundational] science.” 6.4.6. The same term pūrvaśāstra is used in the CAB on CA (4.4.27) and seems to have the same reference, namely Pāṇinian grammar. The above evidence indicates that the Prātiśākhya tradition viewed itself as a description of specific linguistic features found in specific texts, and for more generic facts, it took for granted the prescriptions of the general grammar of Sanskrit. For most of the commentatorial tradition, this general grammar of Sanskrit was non other than that of Pāṇini.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 65 6.5. Which general grammar do the Prātiśākhyas and their commentators assume? 6.5.1. The commentators, as discussed earlier, seem to refer to Pāṇini’s grammar while discussing the general grammar taken for granted by the Prātiśākhyas. I would like to make some important historical distinctions in using the term ‘grammar.’ We must make at least the following distinctions: a) general grammatical principles taken for granted by the Padakāras, but not spelled out clearly by them. b) general grammatical principles taken for granted by the authors of the Prātiśākhyas. c) grammatical system as taken for granted by the commentators. 6.5.2. It is important to make a distinction between these various notions of grammar, so that we may hope to have a clear understanding of the changing historical situation. For example, the Padapāṭha provides us a seg- mentation of the Saṃhitā as a fait accompli. In general, it provides a word-for- word segmentation of the Saṃhitā-text. However, in many cases, it separates the members of compounds, and the base from certain affixes. What we possess is not a theory of segmentation, but the segmentation itself, or the lack of it, and hence we can only indirectly infer the grammatical categories which were used by the authors of the Padapāṭha, cf. V.N. Jha 1987. For instance, we do not know in some cases whether the Padakāra viewed the segments separated by an Avagraha as members of a compound, or as a base and an affix. For instance, the rule CA (4.1.49: कृत्वे समासो वा नानापददर्शनात्) and the commentary CAB on it raise such a question concerning the segment kr̥tvaḥ. For Pāṇini, we know that the item kr̥tvasUC is indeed an affix, cf. P.5.4.17 (संख्यायाः क्रियाभ्यावृत्तिगणने कृत्वसुच्). On the other hand, the facts of the AV Padapāṭha are such that kr̥tvas is sometimes separated by an Avagraha, and sometimes it is not, e.g. aṣṭa-kr̥tvaḥ (AV 11.2.9) is separated by an Avagraha, but daśakr̥tvaḥ (AV 11.2.9) and saptakr̥tvaḥ (AV 12.2.29) are not separated by an Avagraha. The author of the CA says that where it is separated by an Avagraha, it is a case of a Samāsa ‘compound.’ For Pāṇini, it is a case of affixation. All we know about the Padapāṭha is that kr̥tvas is sometimes sepa- rated by an Avagraha. We do not know whether the author of the Padapāṭha treated this as a case of compounding or affixation, or whether these specific

66 INTRODUCTION distinctions between compounding and affixation developed later on. Here, we should note another interesting dimension of this problem. While it is clear that by invoking the category of Samāsa, the author of the CA demonstrates his familiarity with a grammatical system, that grammatical system is indeed not that of Pāṇini. Consider for instance, CA 4.1.50 (जातीयादिषु च). Taken in the context of the previous rule, i.e. CA 4.1.49 (कृत्वे समासो वा …), this rule also relates to the treatment of a segment as a member of a compound, and its consequent segmentation by an Avagraha. There are two points to be taken into account in this case. The expression jātīyādi refers to a Gaṇa or a listing. However, there are no examples of jātīya attested in the AV. This means that the CA is indeed bringing in a Gaṇa from some generalized grammar of Sanskrit. However, while the CA, and probably the grammatical source from which it takes this generalized Gaṇa, treat this as a case of compounding (samāsa), Pāṇini (5.3.69: प्रकारवचने जातीयर्) clearly treats this as a case of affixation. Thus, one can assert that the author of the CA is familiar with a generalized grammar of Sanskrit, but that grammar need not be identical with that of Pāṇini. 6.6. Generalized description of Sanskrit as the occasional target of the Prātiśākhyas 6.6.1. While the term ‘Prātiśākhya’ does indeed seem to imply that ideally there should be a specific Prātiśākhya text for each distinct Śākhā, and that the specific text should not aim at linguistic phenomena extending beyond its chosen Vedic Śākhā, the authors of the Prātiśākhyas, for reasons not clearly understood by us, often sojourn into such external territories. Gopālayajvan in his commentary Vaidikābharaṇa on TPR (11.9) discusses this question: स्वशाखायामलब्धावकाशो हि विधिः शाखान्तरविषयत्वकल्पनयोपपादयितव्यः (Mysore edn., p. 317), “Indeed a rule, for which one does not find an example in one’s own Vedic branch, should be explained as having examples in other Vedic branches.” This issue comes up very often in interpreting the rules of the CA. Consider the following instances: 1) CA (4.2.5-6: षट्पुरसोरुकारोऽन्त्यस्य दशदाशयोरादेश्च मूर्धन्यः). CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्) says that the word ṣoḍaśī is not split with an Avagraha in the Padapāṭha, due to doubts regarding the exact boundaries of the member ele- ments. In part, this statement is simply an observation that the word ṣoḍaśī is not split with an Avagraha. On the other hand, the remainder of the statement, i.e. sandehāt, is a criticism of the author of the Padapāṭha, who apparently could not overcome this alleged sandeha. The rules CA (4.2.5-6) in fact

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 67 represent a clear effort on the part of the author of the CA to overcome this element of sandeha, and in a way mark a grammatical advance over the Padapāṭha. However, of what practical consequence are these rules? The new derivation does not lead to a new segmentation with an Avagraha, but only to a better understanding of the etymology of these words. Such an advance, though indeed praiseworthy, is of little utility in either converting the Padapāṭha into Saṃhitā, or in explaining why a certain segmentation is the way it is. Strictly speaking, this is an advance in the territory of general grammar of Sanskrit, which has its scope extending far beyond that of a Prātiśākhya. 2) CA (1.3.2: कृपे रेफस्य लकारः). This rule, like Pāṇini’s rule P.8.2.18 (कृपो रो लः), derivationally links the forms of kl̥p/kalp with those of kr̥p. What is the practical utility of such a rule for a Prātiśākhya? While it marks an advance in the understanding of the derivation of the forms of kl̥p, the sound- change taught by this rule remains unutilized in the crucial area of the Pada<>Saṃhitā relationship. This change does not figure in the process of samāpatti or restoration of the supposedly original sounds of an item in Pada and Krama variation. The forms of kl̥p are not restored to kr̥p. Thus, this remains an advance in the area of grammatical derivation, which is strictly speaking outside the scope of a Prātiśākhya. 3) CA (1.3.25: शान्मान्दानाम्). This rule teaches that the long ā of the listed roots becomes nasalized before the affix -san. Out of these three roots, only the forms of mān, e.g. mīmāṃsamānāḥ (AV 9.1.3) is attested in the ŚAV. Why should this text concern itself with other roots? Should we assume with Surya Kanta, that the forms of these other roots may have occurred in a sup- posedly more genuine Śaunakīya recension? I, rather, tend to agree with Whitney. He shows the similarity of this CA rule with P.3.1.6 (मान्बधदान्शान्भ्यो दीर्घश्चाभ्यासस्य) and suggests that, in the present rule, the CA is simply carried away by the urge to account for facts of the general grammar of Sanskrit. 6.7. Connection of the CA with the traditions of Sanskrit Grammar. 6.7.1. The following examples show how intricately the CA is con- nected with some traditions of Sanskrit grammar. Some of these features, but not all, look like those of the Pāṇinian grammar, and it is possible that both the texts are drawing upon certain common sources. The CA does not share Pāṇini’s ultra-algebraic style, but it shares a number of common terms, and other features. These are a few illustrations:

68 INTRODUCTION 1) CA (1.3.10: उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य): apr̥kta, cf. P.6.1.67 (वेरपृक्तस्य). 2) CA (1.3.12: ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे): saptamyartha, cf. P.1.1.19 (ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे). 3) CA (1.3.13: द्विवचनान्तौ): dvivacana, cf. P.1.1.11 (ईदूदेद् द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यम्). 4) CA (1.3.16: अमी बहुवचनम्): bahuvacana, cf. P.7.3.103 (बहुवचने झल्येत्). 5) CA (1.3.19: आमन्त्रितं चेतावनार्षे): āmantrita and anārṣa, cf. P.6.1.197 (आमन्त्रितस्य च) and P.1.1.16 (सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येतावनार्षे). 6) CA (1.3.26: वस्वन्तस्य पञ्चपद्याम्): vasU, cf. P.8.3.1 (मतुवसो रु …). 7) CA (1.4.1: वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा): upadhā, cf. P.1.1.65 (अलोऽन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा). 8) CA (2.3.3: समासे सकारः …): samāsa, cf. P.6.1.223 (समासस्य). 9) CA (2.4.3: तद्धिते तकारादौ): taddhita, cf. P.4.1.76 (तद्धिताः). 10) CA (2.4.10: उपसर्गाद्धातोः): upasarga, dhātu, cf. P.6.1.91 (उपसर्गादृति धातौ). 11) CA (2.4.11: अभ्यासाच्च): abhyāsa, P.7.3.55 (अभ्यासाच्च). 12) CA (2.4.17: सुञः): suÑ, cf. P.6.3.134 (इकः सुञि). 13) CA (3.1.4: उञ इदमूष्वादिषु): uÑ, cf. P.1.1.17 (उञः). 14) CA (3.2.10: प्रगृह्याश्च प्रकृत्या): pragr̥hya, prakr̥tyā, cf. P.6.1.125 (प्लुतप्रगृह्या अचि नित्यम्) and P.6.1.115 (प्रकृत्यान्तःपादमव्यपरे). 15) CA (3.2.18: पूर्वपरयोरेकः): cf. P.6.1.84 (एकः पूर्वपरयोः). 16) CA (3.2.19: समानाक्षरस्य सवर्णे दीर्घः): savarṇa, dīrgha, cf. P.6.1.101 (अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः). 17) CA (3.4.4: विभक्तयागमप्रातिपदिकान्तस्य): vibhakti, prātipadika, cf. P.8.4.11 (प्रातिपदिकान्तनुम्विभक्तिषु च). 18) CA (4.1.42: तातिलि): tātiL, cf. P.4.4.142 (सर्वदेवात्तातिल्). 19) CA (4.2.1: न तकारसकाराभ्यां मत्वर्थे): matvarthe, cf. P.4.4.128 (मत्वर्थे मासतन्वोः). 20) CA (4.2.2: यत्तदेतेभ्यो वतौ): vatU, cf. P.5.2.39 (यत्तदेतेभ्यः परिमाणे वतुप्). 6.7.2. To show that the CA has similarities with the Pāṇinian gram- mar, but is not exclusively identical to it, consider the following non-Pāṇinian grammatical features:

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 69 1) Lack of Pāṇini’s algebraic formulations: CA (1.3.2: कृपे रेफस्य लकारः) versus P.8.2.18 (कृपो रो लः) CA (1.3.12: ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे) versus P.1.1.19 (ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे) CA (1.4.1: वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा) vs. P.1.1.65 (अलोऽन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा) 2) Non-Pāṇinian terminology: CA (1.2.15: परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि). Contrast svara and vyañjana with Pāṇini’s algebraic shortforms aC and haL, respectively. CA (1.3.26: वस्वन्तस्य पञ्चपद्याम्). Contrast pañcapadī with Pāṇini’s sarvanāmasthāna as defined by P.1.1.43 (सुड- नपुंसकस्य). CA (2.1.2: पदान्तानामनुत्तमानां तृतीया घोषवत्स्वरेषु). Contrast tr̥tīya and ghoṣavat with Pāṇini’s algebraic shortforms jaŚ and jhaŚ in P.8.4.53 (झलां जश् झशि). CA (2.4.7: नामिकरेफात् प्रत्ययसकारस्य). Contrast nāmi-ka-rephāt with Pāṇini’s iṆ-koḥ in P.8.3.57 (इण्कोः). CA (3.2.26: भूतकरणस्य च). Contrast bhūtakaraṇasya with āṭaḥ in P.6.1.90 (आटश्च). 3) Non-Pāṇinian procedures: (For details, see Notes on the respective CA rules) CA (2.1.3: पदान्ते चाघोषाः) vs. P.8.4.56 (वावसाने). CA (2.1.31: मकारस्य स्पर्शे परसस्थानः) vs. P.8.4.58 (अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः). CA (3.4.25-26: व्यवाये शसलैः, चटतवर्गैश्च) vs. P.8.4.2 (अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि). The conclusion based on the above evidence is that the CA was familiar with grammatical traditions which were in part like Pāṇini’s grammar, but in part different from it. It does not look like a text which is a direct reworking of Pāṇini’s grammar.

70 INTRODUCTION 6.8. The early tradition reflected in the metrical authority quoted in the CAB. 6.8.1. The CAB looks like a fairly old commentary, perhaps as old as the KV. The commentary occasionally quotes statements which look like Vārttikas of some sort, and these mark an advance of the tradition, beyond the stage set by the CA itself. The commentary also quotes profusely from a met- rical authority, some verses of which are identical with those of the Varṇa- paṭala, a Pariśiṣṭa of the Atharvaveda. However, this commentary quotes a large number of verses which are not attested in the currently available text of the Varṇapaṭala. It is likely that the Varṇapaṭala is itself a short selection from a larger older authority. This older authority is probably older than the text of the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā. This Śikṣā was not known to the CAB. Whether the metrical authority quoted to elucidate the contents of the CA is older than the CA itself is a difficult question. CA (1.2.10: पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परम्) is identical with the first two quarters of a verse quoted in the CAB on this rule: पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परम् । प्रत्ययेन भवेत् कार्यमेतत् संयुक्तमिष्यते ॥ There is indeed a possibility that the metrical authority is older than the text of the CA, though one cannot be completely certain in this matter. In any case, the metrical authority is older than the CAB. 6.8.2. The metrical authority exhibits greater familiarity with the Pāṇinian tradition, as compared to the rules of the Caturādhyāyikā. This can be seen from the following instances: a)Metrical Authority: एदैतोः, on CA (1.1.19). Here, in the expressions eT and aiT, the marker T is clearly identical with the marker T defined in P.1.1.70 (तपरस्तत्कालस्य). b)Metrical Authority: समानास्यप्रयत्ना ये ते सवर्णा इति स्मृताः, on CA (1.1.27). This is the only known early authority which coin- cides with P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्) in its use of the term āsyaprayatna. The CA does not use this term. c)Metrical Authority: टाशब्दः, on CA (4.1.33) to refer to the instrumental singular affix. Pāṇini (4.1.2: स्वौजसमौट्छस्टा…) also

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 71 uses the expression ṭā for the same affix. The metrical authority seems to take this term for granted. d)Metrical Authority: अङ्गस्य, on CA (4.1.38). The CA does not use the term aṅga, but P.1.3.13 (यस्मात् प्रत्ययविधिस्तदादि प्रत्ययेऽ- ङ्गम्) defines this term. The metrical authority seems to take this term for granted. e)Metrical Authority: कृत्, on CA (4.1.48-49). The term kr̥t is not used by the CA. Pāṇini defines it as P.3.1.93 (कृदतिङ्). The metrical authority seems to take this term for granted. f)Metrical Authority: मतुप् and मयट्, on CA (4.1.49). CA (4.2.1: न तकारसकाराभ्यां मत्वर्थे) knows the first affix as matu, and CA (4.1.46: मयेऽसकारात्) knows the second affix as maya. Pāṇini refers to these affixes as matuP (P.5.2.94: तदस्यास्त्यस्मिन्निति मतुप्) and mayaṬ (P.5.4.21: तत्प्रकृतवचने मयट्). g)Metrical Authority: किकिनौ, on CA (4.1.57). These two affixes are taught by Pāṇini (3.2.171: आदृगमहनजनः किकिनौ लिट् च). h)Metrical Authority: बहुलं छन्दसि, on CA (4.1.57). This is a ref- erence to a rule in Pāṇini, which occurs a number of times in his grammar, e.g. P.3.2.88. i)Metrical Authority:अभ्यासस्य च दीर्घत्वं दीर्घोऽकितेति दृश्यते । … यद्यभ्यासस्य दीर्घत्वं तुजादीनां च यङ्लुकोः । सवर्णे च परोक्षायां …, on CA (4.3.12). Compare: P.7.4.83 (दीर्घोऽकितः), P.6.1.7 (तुजादीनां दीर्घोऽभ्यासस्य), and P.6.4.78 (अभ्यासस्यासवर्णे). This evidence amply demonstrates that the versified authority quoted by the CAB was fully familiar with Pāṇini’s grammar, and that it quotes it profusely. At the same time, one must make it clear that it is almost totally free from the impact of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā and the phonetic doctrines of the later Pāṇinian tradition. It is in many ways closer to the tradition represented in the RPR. 6.8.3. To illustrate its relatively more archaic phonetic doctrines, I shall draw attention to the following details. Unlike the metrical Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 18: एऐ तु कण्ठतालव्यावोऔ कण्ठोष्ठजौ स्मृतौ), this cited metrical authority

72 INTRODUCTION regards only ai and au as having an initial kaṇṭhya element (कण्ठ्यः … ऐदौतोराद्ययोर्मात्रयोः स्मृतः, on CA 1.1.19), while the sounds e and o are consid- ered to be tālavya and oṣṭhya, respectively (cf. ताल्वेयशचवर्गाणामिवर्णस्य च, on CA 1.1.21; उपध्मानीय ओकारो … तथा (ओष्ठ्याः) मताः, on CA 1.1.25). It holds the sounds r̥, l̥, ka-varga, and the jihvāmūlīya to be jihvāmūlīya sounds (cf. जिह्वामूलमृवर्णस्य कवर्गस्य च भाष्यते । यश्चैव जिह्वामूलीय ऌवर्णश्चेति च स्मृतः, on CA 1.1.20). The only retroflex sounds are ṣ and the ṭavarga (cf. मूर्धा स्थानं षकारस्य टवर्गस्य तथा मतम्, on CA 1.1.22). The sound r is treated as a dantamūlīya, though the metrical authority is aware of other views on its alternative classi- fications (cf. रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि … अपर आह … हनुमूले तु रेफस्य दन्तमूलेषु वा पुनः । प्रत्यग्वा दन्तमूलेभ्यो मूर्धन्य इति चापरे, on CA 1.1.28). Thus, on the whole, this ancient metrical authority holds fairly archaic phonetic classifications, while exhibiting a wide ranging awareness of Pāṇinian terminology. 6.9. The tradition as reflected in the CAB 6.9.1. The CAB exhibits greater familiarity with the Pāṇinian rules. It quotes some of them directly. Also, while quoting the ancient metrical authority discussed above, it offers phonetic classifications which are more in line with the later Pāṇinian system as represented by the metrical Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. 6.9.2. Direct and Indirect Quotations of Pāṇini’s rules a) CAB on CA 1.1.2. ‘लीढ’मित्यत्र हो ढत्वम् (cf. ‘हो ढः,’ पा. ८.२.३१)। परचतुर्थत्वम् (cf. ‘झषस्तथोर्धोऽधः,’ पा. ८.२.४०)। ष्टुना ष्टुत्वम् (cf. ‘ष्टुना ष्टुः,’ पा. ८.४.४१)। ढो ढे लोपो (cf. ‘ढो ढे लोपः,’ पा. ८.३.१३) दीर्घत्वमिति (cf. ‘ढ्रलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घोऽणः,’ पा. ६.३.१११) वैयाकरणेन वक्तव्यम् । b) CAB on CA 1.1.3 एवम् इह इति च । अस्यां शाखायां तत् प्रातिज्ञं मन्यन्ते । ‘यरोऽ- नुनासिकेऽनुनासिको वा’ (पा. ८.४.४५) इति विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये। किं सामान्यम् । व्याकरणम् । वक्ष्यति ‘उत्तमा उत्तमेषु’ (च.आ. २.१.५) इति ।

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 73 6.9.3.Non-Atharvan examples which are shared with Pāṇinian commentaries: a) CAB on CA 1.2.9 अतोऽन्ये व्यञ्जनसंधयः संयुक्ता भवन्ति । अन्ये अभिनिधानात् पदान्तात् स्पर्शाः । अन्तस्थोष्मसु पदादिषु च संयुज्यन्ते । ‘गोधुग्याति’ । ‘विराड् याति’ । ‘दृषद्याति’। ‘त्रिष्टुब्याति’ । ‘गोधुग्वयति’ । ‘विराड्वयति’ । ‘त्रिष्टुब्वयति’ । ‘गोधुग्रथे’ । ‘विराड्रथे’ । ‘षड्रथे’ । ‘गोधुक्शेते’ । ‘विराट्शेते’। ‘दृषत्शेते’ । ‘त्रिष्टुप्शेते’ । ‘गोधुक्षण्डे’ । ‘विराट्षण्डे’ । ‘दृषत्षण्डे’ । ‘त्रिष्टुप्षण्डे’ । ‘गोधुक्साये’ । ‘विराट्साये’। ‘दृषत्साये’ । ‘त्रिष्टुप्साये’ । All the examples cited by the CAB are artificial examples pro- duced by combinations and permutations of a few words. Examples with śete, sāye, and ṣaṇḍe are found in the KV on P.8.3.28, 29, 30, and 36. b) CAB on CA 1.4.1: वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्वो वर्णः उपधासंज्ञो भवति । ‘नाम्युपधस्य रेफः’ (च.आ. २.२.३)। ‘अग्निरत्र’ (not in AV)। ‘वायुरत्र’ (not in AV)। The examples agniratra and vāyuratra provided by the CAB are found in the KV on P.8.2.66 (ससजुषो रुः). c) CAB on CA 2.1.14: चटवर्गयोः परतः तकारस्य पर(स)स्थानो भवति । … ‘अग्निचिट्टीकते’ (not in AV)। ‘सोमसुड्डीयते’ (not in AV)। The example agniciṭṭīkate is actually found in the KV on P.8.4.41. d) CAB on CA 2.1.26: नकारस्य चटतवर्गेषु अघोषेषु अनूष्मपरेषु विसर्जनीयो भवति । ‘भवांश्चिनोति’ (not in AV)। ‘भवांश्छादयति’ (not in AV)। ‘भवांष्टीकते’ (not in AV)। ‘भवांस्तरति’ (not in AV)। ‘भवांस्तत्र’ (not in AV)। अघोषेष्वित्येव । ‘बृ॒हन् दक्षि॑णया’ (अ.वे. ६.५३.१)। ‘नैना॒न्नम॑सा प॒रः’ (अ.वे. ७.७.१)। अनूष्मपरेष्वित्येव । ‘भवान्त्सरु’ (not in AV)। ‘महान्त्सरु’ (not in AV)।

74 INTRODUCTION Most of the examples, not attested in the AV, are found in the KV on P.8.3.7 (नश्छव्यप्रशान्). It is absolutely unconscionable that the commentary does not offer a single example from the text of the Atharvan to illustrate this phenomenon, which is by no means rare in the Atharvan text. By citing the examples which he does, the commentator shows how deeply influenced he is by the of Pāṇinian tradition. e) CAB on CA 2.4.3: तद्धिते परतः तकारादौ नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘सर्पि- ष्टरम्’ (not in AV)। ‘यजुष्टरम्’ (not in AV)। ‘वपुष्टरम्’ (not in AV, ऋ.वे. १०.३२.३)। ‘वपुष्टमाम्’ (‘वपुष्ट॑मे,’ अ.वे. ५.५.६)। तद्धित इति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒ग्निस्त॒क्मान॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५. २२.१)। तकारादा- विति किमर्थम् । ‘सर्पिस्सात्’ (not in AV)। ‘यजुस्सात्’ (not in AV)। ‘वपुस्सात्’ (not in AV)। Most of the unattested examples quoted in the CAB are found in the KV on P.8.3.99 (ह्रस्वात् तादौ तद्धिते). f) CAB on CA 3.2.19: समानाक्षरस्य सवर्णे परतः दीर्घो भवति । ‘दण्डाग्रम्’। ‘दधीन्द्रः’ । ‘मधूष्णम्’ । ‘होतॄश्यः’ । ‘पितॄश्यः’ । The KV on P.6.1.101 (अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः) cites the examples daṇḍāgram, dadhīndraḥ, madhūdake, and hotr̥̄śyaḥ. The Osmania edition of the KV notes a manuscript variant madhūṣṭram for madhūdake. This variant is probably a cor- ruption of madhūṣṇam. 6.9.4.Influence of the Late Pāṇinian Phonetic Classifications: a) The CAB includes e, ai, o, and au, among the kaṇṭhya sounds, implying that the initial elements of all the four are kaṇṭhya sounds (cf. CAB on CA 1.1.19). This notion is more in line with the metrical Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 1: एऐ तु कण्ठतालव्यावोऔ कण्ठोष्ठजौ स्मृतौ), and it directly contradicts the doctrines of the cited metrical authority (कण्ठ्यः … ऐदौतोराद्ययोर्मात्रयोः स्मृतः, on CA 1.1.19, ताल्वेयशचवर्गाणामिवर्णस्य च, on CA 1.1.21; उपध्मानीय ओकारो … तथा ओष्ठ्याः मताः, on CA 1.1.25).

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 75 b) On CA 1.1.22, it includes r among the mūrdhanya sounds, again contradicting both the cited metrical authority, as well as the direct prescription of the CA 1.1.28 (रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि). This notion is closer to the metrical Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 17: स्युर्मूर्धन्या ऋटुरषाः). The CAB (on CA 1.1.28) says that the ‘roots of teeth’ (dantamūlāni) are the karaṇa ‘articulator’ for r. This is believed not to contradict the claim that r is a mūrdhanya sound. However, it makes little sense to say that the ‘cerebrum, top of the oral cavity’ is the point of articulation for r, and that the ‘roots of teeth’ are the articulator for it. c) While the cited metrical authority (in CAB on CA 1.1.25) considers v to be an oṣṭhya sound, the CAB (on CA 1.1.25) takes it out of the list of oṣṭhya sounds, possibly implying that v is a dantyoṣṭhya ‘labio-dental’ sound. This is again closer to the doctrines of the metrical Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 18: दन्त्योष्ठ्यो वः स्मृतो बुधैः). 6.10.The Pāṇinian Drift seen in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s Vr̥tti 6.10.1. While the CAB is probably closer in date to the KV, the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara and the Pañcasandhi by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa represent the very late phase of this tradition. These late works indicate that the tradition of the CA has now come under the full Pāṇinian influence as typified by works like Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita’s SK. This late tradition does not show any awareness of the existence of the older commentary CAB, or of the metrical authority quoted by the CAB. Bhārgava-Bhāskara cites not only Pāṇini’s rules, but also the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā, and he twists the meaning of the CA rules to fit the interpretations of Pāṇini’s rules found in the late texts like the SK. Below we shall briefly review the evidence from Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary: a) On CA 1.1.10: पाणिनीये तु ‘वावसाने’ (पा. ८.४.५६) इति विकल्पः । b) On CA 1.1.16: अत एवोक्तम् ‘उच्चैरुदात्तम्’ इति वक्ष्यमाणेषु कण्ठादिस्थानेषूच्चार्यमाणो ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतस्वरः उच्चैरूर्ध्वभागे उत्पन्नः उदात्तसंज्ञः - ऊर्ध्वमात्तः उदात्तः ।
‘नीचैरनुदात्तम्’ । तथाविधस्थानेष्वधोभागेषूच्चार्यमाणः स्वरः अनुदात्तसंज्ञः उदात्तविरुद्धः अनुदात्तः । ‘आक्षिप्तं स्वरितम्’ । आ उभयार्थकः उभयधर्मावभिव्याप्य क्षिप्तमुच्चारितमक्षरं स्वरितं स्यात् ।

Compare SK on P.1.2.29, 1.2.30, and 1.2.31.

76 INTRODUCTION c) On CA 1.1.17: पाणिनीयेऽपि - ‘तस्यादित उदात्तमर्धह्रस्वम्’ (पा. १.२.३२) इति | d) On CA 1.1.18: चतुराध्यायीभाष्य- मुखे विशेषा भवन्ति करणस्य । कचटतपाः । भा.भा.वृत्ति - मुखे वदनान्तराकाशप्रान्तदेशे । करणस्य स्पृष्टादिसंज्ञक- प्रयत्नस्य विशेषाः । वर्णोच्चारणस्थानभेदाः कथ्यन्ते । Contrast the two commentaries. Bhārgava-Bhāskara seems to have confused the notion of prayatna as it appears in the Pāṇinian school with that of karaṇa in this text. The first term refers to the manner in which the articulator (karaṇa) relates to the point of articulation (sthāna). On the other hand, the second term refers to the articulator. e) On CA 1.1.22: मुखबिले ऊर्ध्वायाः हनोर्मध्यदेशः वर्णोच्चारे मूर्धेति संज्ञा । तत्र भवा मूर्धन्याः ऋकारटवर्गौ । ऋटठडढण एषां षण्णां प्रतिवेष्टितं जिह्वाग्रं किञ्चिद्वक्रीकृत्य मूर्धस्थानं स्पृष्ट्वा निमुच्यते । Here Bhārgava-Bhāskara includes the sound r̥ among the mūrdhanya sounds. This is not done either by the metrical authority or by the CAB. While he excludes the sound r from the list of mūrdhanyas here, later he includes r as well among mūrdhanyas or near-mūrdhanyas. f) On CA 1.1.28: रेफो मूर्धन्यः । दन्तमूलशब्दः सामीप्यं द्योतयति बहु- वचननिर्देशात्। दन्तमूलस्थानं मूर्धस्थानं च तयोर्मध्ये रेफोच्चारणस्थानं ज्ञेयं तकारटकारोच्चारणस्थानयोर्मध्यस्थानमित्यर्थः । g) On CA 1.1.25: वकारस्य तु ऊर्ध्वदन्ताग्राधरस्पर्शेनोच्चारो भवति । पाणिनीये वकारस्य दन्तोष्ठ्यताया आम्नातत्वात् । h) On CA 1.1.28: सन्ध्यक्षराणि तु स्थानद्वयोच्चारितानि ज्ञेयानि । तथा च पाणिनीये - ‘ए ऐ तु कण्ठतालव्या ओ औ कण्ठोष्ठजौ स्मृतौ’ ॥ (पाणिनीयशिक्षा, श्लोक १८) इति शिक्षायां पठितम् । i) On CA 1.1.29: कादयो मावसानाः पञ्चविंशतिः स्पर्शाः । तेषां करणमाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नः स्पृष्टसंज्ञको ज्ञेयः । The term ābhyantara- prayatna here and in the following instances is reminiscent of the late Pāṇinian tradition.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 77 j) On CA 1.1.30: अन्तःस्थानां करणमाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नः ईषत्स्पृष्टो ज्ञेयः । k) On CA 1.1.31: एषामूष्मणामाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नः विवृतसंज्ञः । l) On CA 1.1.32: स्वराणां च विवृतसंज्ञः प्रयत्नो ज्ञेयः । It is clearly seen from the above evidence that Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary has offered a fully late-Pāṇinian interpretation of the CA rules. He has no knowledge of the older commentary CAB or of the metrical authority quoted by the CAB. His authorities include the late Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, but more importantly, the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. Thus the independence of the CA tradition is lost in this process. Since Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commen- tary is available to us only in an incomplete form, it is difficult to assess what he did with the rest of the CA rules. 6.11.Full Pāṇinianization of the CA rules in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s Kautsavyākaraṇe Pañcasandhiḥ 6.11.1. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s Kautsavyākaraṇe Pañcasandhiḥ represents the latest and the most severe case of Pāṇinianization of a Prātiśākhya tradition. The text probably belongs to the period after the SK of Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita became popular. It reorganizes the rules of the CA using the model of the SK,4 and seems to add a whole host of new Sūtras, not found in the CA. Almost at every step, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa compares the CA formulations with those of Pāṇini, and effectively provides a fully Pāṇinian interpretation of the CA rules. In contrast with the CAB as well as Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa hardly quotes Atharvan examples. Most of his examples are identical with those found in texts like the SK, and in effect he is trying to build a grammar of the classical language using the rules of the CA, and in this process he stretches the CA rules maximally in the direction of the late Pāṇinian tradition. The following examples are offered to illustrate this phenomenon of maximal Pāṇinianization in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work. In my notes on Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work, I have discussed the parallelisms with the late Pāṇinian works such as the SK more fully. Here, a few instances are noted:

4 In this respect, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work resembles the commentary Prātiśākhyajyotsnā on the VPR. For details on this work and its reorganization of the VPR rules along the lines of Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita’s SK, see: Sunanda R. Abhyankar (1984).

78 INTRODUCTION a) Before PS 6: ऋटुरषा मूर्धन्याः । b) On PS 10: दन्त्यौष्ठ्यो वकारः । c) On PS 12: प्रयत्नो द्विधा । आभ्यन्तरो बाह्यश्च । तत्राभ्यन्तरश्चतुर्धा । स्पृष्टेषत्स्पृष्टविवृतसंवृतभेदात् । ‘कादयो मावसानाः स्पर्शाः’ इति पाणिनीयाः । d) On PS 27: विवृतमनूद्य संवृतोऽनेन विधीयते ह्रस्वस्यावर्णस्य प्रयोगे संवृतं प्रक्रियादशायां तु विवृतमेव । e) On PS 32: अत्र सूत्रे प्रक्रियाद्वयं दृश्यते ‘सरूपाणामेकशेष’ … (पा. १.२.६४) इत्येका वृत्तिः । ‘नाज्झलौ’ (पा. १.१.१०) इति पाणिनीये आकारप्रश्लेष इवार्थबलात् । ‘हलन्त्यम्’ (पा. १.३.३) इतिवत् । f) ८७. स्थानार्था षष्ठी (not found in CA)। षष्ठीनिर्दिष्टं कार्यं तस्यैव स्थाने बोध्यम् । ८८. पञ्चम्युत्तरस्य (not found in CA)। ८९. सप्तमी पूर्वस्य (not found in CA)। ९०. आद्यन्तानि टवर्गकवर्गव्यञ्जनानि (not found in CA)। ९१. असिद्धं बहिरङ्गमन्तरङ्गे (not found in CA)। विनाशोन्मुखं कार्यं न कुर्यात्। ९२. इतो लोपः (not found in CA)। इत्संज्ञकस्येत्यर्थः । ९३. विधायकस्य न (not found in CA)। ९४. वर्णग्रहे सवर्णमात्रम् (not found in CA)। …इति परिभाषाप्रकरणम् ॥ This whole section is a new creation in imitation of Pāṇinian rules. g) On PS 126: समानसंज्ञिकस्य स्वरस्य स्थाने सवर्णे स्वरे परे सति द्वयोरपि स्थाने दीर्घरूप एकादेशः । … कृष्ण अवलम्ब इत्यत्रोभयोर्ह्रस्वयोरकारयोः दीर्घे आकारादेशे कृष्णावलम्ब इति सिद्धम् । वेदाध्ययनं दैवाधीनमित्यपि च । h) On PS 132: अकारस्य स्थाने उवर्णे परे द्वयोरेक ओकारादेशः स्यात् । कृष्ण उपास्यः कृष्णोपास्यः, गङ्गोदकम्, राम ऊनः रामोनः, जाया ऊतिः जायोतिः, इला आ ऊर्ध्वम् इलोर्ध्वम् । i) On PS 133: अकारस्य स्थाने ऋवर्णे परे द्वयोरपि स्थाने एकः अर् भवति । अरमिति नपुंसकत्वमार्षम्। कृष्ण ऋद्धिः कृष्णर्द्धिः । जल ऋतुः जलर्तुः । ब्रह्मर्षयः । तव ऌकारः तवल्कारः । सावर्ण्यात्समानः प्रयोगः ।

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 79 6.12. The changing nature of the CA tradition On the basis of the above evidence tracing the historical changes which occurred in the CA tradition, we can draw the following conclusions. The CA itself was perhaps familiar with Pāṇinian, or perhaps Pāṇini- like, terminology, and occasionally it does venture into explanations of formations which do not occur in the AV, but on the whole it is an authentic description of a particular phase of the Śaunakīya AV. Generally, the text is concerned with the AV, and represents a distinct tradition. The Metrical Authority, an ancient Śikṣā relating to the AV tradition, predates the later Māṇḍūkīśikṣā. It shows substantial familiarity with Pāṇini’s system, and yet it shows a true independent view of Sanskrit phonetics, not colored by what one finds in the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. We can safely assume that this ancient Śikṣā predates the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. The CAB shows even greater familiarity with the Pāṇinian tradition, perhaps with the KV. Its phonetic description is beginning to show signs of the influence of the late Pāṇinian tradition, though it does not directly quote the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. However, it is clear that its deviations from the quoted Metrical Authority are in the direction of the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. At the same time, it is genuinely related to the Atharvavedic tradition, and it has a very close connection with the APR edited by Surya Kanta. The commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara shows a deep influence of the Pāṇinian tradition. It looks like it has no knowledge of either the CAB or the Metrical Authority quoted by it. On the other hand, it quotes Pāṇini, the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, and the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. Its interpretations are colored by this late phase of the Pāṇinian tradition. However, at the same time it must be admitted that it is closely linked with the Atharvavedic tradition, and it cites a large number of examples from the text of the Atharvaveda. The last text, i.e. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s Kautsavyākaraṇe Pañcasandhiḥ, is a truly different text. It is an SK-style reorganization of the CA rules, clearly dominated by the SK. It is only peripherally part of the Atharvavedic tradition. The examples cited by this commentary are hardly different from those of the SK, and rarely does it cite anything from the AV. It is an effort to write a grammar of the classical language using the rules of the CA, supplemented by a set of new rules based on the Pāṇinian system. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work is also largely influenced by Anubhūtisvarūpācārya’s Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa. The above survey indicates how the tradition of the CA gradually lost its individuality and came under the direct influence of the dominant grammatical paradigm, i.e. the Pāṇinian tradition. This influence perhaps kept the tradition

80 INTRODUCTION of the CA alive, but in the process of keeping it alive, the CA tradition was gradually drained of its grammatical and phonetic distinctiveness, and, in this sense, the Pāṇinian influence must be viewed as a negative force, and not a positive help in the interpretation of the Prātiśākhya tradition. 7. The AV Prātiśākhyas and the ŚAV Text- Transmission 7.1.General Issues of Saṃhitā Formation and Transmission 7.1.1. In his MB, Patañjali says that the Atharvaveda has nine differ- ent recensions (cf. नवधाथर्वणो वेदः, MB, Vol.I, p. 9). However, the Saṃhitā of the Atharvaveda is available to us at present only in two major recensions, i.e. the Śaunakīya and the Paippalāda. The two recensions differ in their overall organization of the material, and the readings for individual verses differ in hundreds of places. The readings found in any one recension are authentic only in so far as they represent that particular recension of the Atharvaveda, and there is no intrinsic claim for any reading to represent the Ur-Atharvaveda, if indeed there was such a thing. With the Vedic Saṃhitās, scholars have proposed two distinct phases of oral transmission. Oldenberg (1890, 1962: 28), referring to the Saṃhitā of the RV, says: “The study of Śaunaka’s work [= RPR] affords us the proof that from that time on the Vedic hymns, protected by the united care of grammatical and religious respect for letters, have suffered no further appreciable corruptions.” However, worth noting are his comments on the pre-redaction textual transmission: “In some cases, isolated details of the additions of prior epochs were caught and clung to with felicitous acumen; in others, no hesitation was had in wiping out of existence entire domains of old and genuine phenomena to suit half-correct theories, so that the most patient ingenuity of modern science will only be able to restore in part what has been lost” (1890, 1962: 27). He further reminds us that “the collection was re- corrected on repeated occasions. It is conceivable enough that thus the original structure, yes, even the existence itself of special hymns was often injured, effaced, or destroyed” (1890, 1962: 26). The first phase represented the pre- redaction period of the oral transmission, uncontrolled and unguided by any systematic efforts at standardization, while the post-redaction phase was characterized by a great deal of systematic standardization of the text in its organization as well as its pronunciation. This second phase began with the work of scholars like Śākalya for the RV, and Śaunaka for the Śaunakīya AV.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 81 Patañjali refers to Śākalya’s well-prepared Saṃhitā (cf. शाकल्येन सुकृतां संहितामनुनिशम्य देवः प्रावर्षत्, MB on P.1.4.84, Vol.I, p. 347) of the RV. Śaunaka probably did the same thing for the AV Saṃhitā and prepared its Padapāṭha. As it has been documented more fully for Śākalya, the Padapāṭha reflects his understanding of the words of the Saṃhitā. It also reflects certain features of his own dialect of Sanskrit (Cardona 1991). Finally, the Saṃhitā was to be rebuilt by changing the Padapāṭha by applying the rules of Sandhi, and hence in certain respects, the Saṃhitā, thus arrived at, reflected more modern features, as compared to the original compositions of the Vedic seers which are now lost to us. Thus, a given Saṃhitā represents not precisely the original compositions of the Vedic seers, but compositions as they were received, understood, interpreted, and organized by a particular Saṃhitākāra. As this is true of Śākalya’s recension of the RV, so it must be true of Śaunaka’s recension of the AV. 7.1.2.With all this, one may develop an impression that such recen- sions or Saṃhitās, once they were so well put together by the respective Saṃhitākāras, must have been essentially immutable, not susceptible to any further change. As we shall see, such an expectation is wide-spread, but in fact unfounded. For instance, we know that Pāṇini knew Śākalya’s RV Saṃhitā, as he directly quotes Śākalya’s opinions in several places (cf. लोपः शाकल्यस्य, P. 8.3.19; सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येतावनार्षे, P.1.1.16). However, can we be certain that he knew Śākalya’s recension exactly as we know it today? Did he know the RV with ḷ for intervocalic ḍ, or did his version not have this feature? In my opinion, the latter alternative is more likely. If the RV recension of Śākalya which has come down to us shows somewhat different features than what were known to Pāṇini, is it possible for us to say that only one of these versions is a true Śākalya recension, and that what survives is not a Śākalya recension in a real sense? Or should we rather abandon the view of the supposed immutability of these recensions, and accept a view that the recensions once formulated by scholars like Śākalya and Śaunaka did undergo a slow process of marginal change. Some of this change was imperceptible phonetic change for a long time, but eventually such changes accumulated over a period of time. In spite of such changes, it was still possible for the successive generations of redactors to believe that they were still maintaining the ancient recension formulated by Śākalya or Śaunaka. If we accept such a view of the transmission of Vedic Saṃhitās, we may have a different understanding of how these Saṃhitās were transmitted. Here we shall investigate some of these questions in relation to the text-transmission of the

82 INTRODUCTION Śaunakīya AV Saṃhitā and the exegetical tradition represented by the AV Prātiśākhyas. 7.2. The CA and the text of the ŚAV 7.2.1. Though the 1856 Roth-Whitney edition of the Śaunakīya Saṃhitā of the AV came out before Whitney’s 1862 edition of the Caturādhyāyikā, Roth and Whitney were already in possession of the then known single Berlin manuscript of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā with the commentary CAB. Although this lone manuscript was terribly corrupt, Whit- ney was able to extract a working text of the CA before he and Roth finalized the text of their edition of the AV. Since they were editing the Śaunakīya AV, they could see the value of the rules of the CA in the process of establishing the text of the Saṃhitā. However, their AV manuscripts did not always agree with the prescriptions of the CA. Whitney dutifully notes this divergence in his notes on the CA. In such cases, Roth and Whitney were faced with the question of whether to follow the authority of the manuscripts, or to abandon the manuscripts and follow the rules of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā in set- tling the reading to be selected. There were several assumptions to be made in deciding this question. The text to be finally printed as that of the Śaunakīya AV must ideally represent the text as settled by Śaunaka. Secondly, the text which called itself Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā must also be assumed to reflect the opinions of Śaunaka as regards the Saṃhitā and the Padapāṭha of this school. Therefore, on the face of it, it seemed that one could follow the CA in settling the text of the Śaunakīya Saṃhitā. In practice, the Roth-Whitney edition of the ŚAV Saṃhitā follows the CA and rejects the manuscripts in some places, and follows the manuscripts and rejects the CA in other places, and Surya Kanta has rightly criticized Whitney and Roth for this haphazard behavior: “What RW (= Roth-Whitney) have done in such cases is this, that, either they have ignored the CA authority, adopting the unanimous reading of the Vulgate mss., or they have flouted the Vulgate mss., and followed the former” (APR, Intro., p. 32). 7.3. Surya Kanta’s assumption of the ‘lost original Śaunakīya AV’ 7.3.1. In 1923, Vishva Bandhu (= Vidyārthī) published a text by the title the Atharvaprātiśākhya, and in 1939, Surya Kanta published his magnifi- cent expanded and annotated edition of the same Atharvaprātiśākhya. All the

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 83 manuscripts used for this text directly called it Atharvaprātiśākhya. Until then, the title Atharvaprātiśākhya was used with reference to the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā edited by Whitney. Whitney himself knew that the CA did not call itself a Prātiśākhya, and yet he argued (1862: iii): “The treatise was first brought to light, and its character deter-mined, by Roth. It was recognized by him as being what is indicated by our title, a Prātiśākhya to a text of the Atharvaveda. That it has any inherent right to be called the Prātiśākhya to the Atharvaveda is not, of course, claimed for it; but, considering the extreme improbability that any other like phonetic treatise, belonging to any other schools of that Veda, will ever be brought to light, the title of Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya finds a sufficient justification in its convenience, and in its analogy with the names given to the other kindred treatises by their respective editors.” The above paragraph from Whitney needs to be read carefully, and one should note that he nowhere asserted that the CA is the Prātiśākhya of the Atharva-Veda, an accusation hurled at him unjustly by Surya Kanta (Atharva- Prātiśākhya, Introduction, p. 31): “Whitney turns an APr into the APr.” Whitney never made such a claim. Whitney’s modest claim that the CA was ‘a Prātiśākhya’ of the AV was clearly not out of line, and now stands supported by a reference in Uvaṭa’s commentary on the first Paṭala of the R̥gveda- Prātiśākhya: (M.D. Shastri’s edition, Vol. II, p. 23): तथा चाथर्वणप्रातिशाख्ये इदमेव प्रयोजनमुक्तम् - ‘एवमिहेति च विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्येन’ - अस्य सूत्रस्यायमर्थः - सामान्येन लक्षणेन यद् विकल्पप्राप्तं तदेवमस्यां शाखायां व्यवस्थितं भवतीति प्रातिशाख्यप्रयोजनमुक्तम् ।, “Thus, the same purpose is mentioned in the Ātharvaṇa-Prātiśākhya rule evam iheti ca vibhāṣāprāptaṃ sāmānyena (= CA 1.1.3-4, Whitney 1.2). The meaning of this rule is as follows: Whatever obtains optionally in a generic grammar of Sanskrit is settled in a particular way in this branch. Thus, the purpose of the Prātiśākhya is explained.” Clearly, Uvaṭa refers to CA as an Ātharvaṇa- Prātiśākhya. 7.3.2. Anyway, now we are fortunately in possession of two texts which belong to the category of Prātiśākhyas for the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda, or are we mistaken? If we are to believe Surya Kanta, we are indeed mistaken. To put his claim in his own words: “The Atharva-Prātiśākhya belongs to the AV., and the CA belongs to the Śaunakīya School of this Saṃhitā, and not to the AV. in general” (APR, Intro., p. 32). He argues that the APR clearly does not belong to the Paippalāda tradition, nor does it call itself Śaunakīya at any place, and therefore it belongs to a non-Paippalāda and a non-Śaunakīya recension of the AV. This, he calls, ‘the AV,’ in contrast with the Śaunakīya recension, which he assumes must be the subject of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. He offers the following arguments to support his case. For

84 INTRODUCTION each argument, I have provided only a few sample examples, though Surya Kanta has offered a large number of such examples. 7.3.3.Argument a: 7.3.3.1. In a number of places, the Vulgate of the AV, the text repre- sented by the manuscripts, agrees more closely with the description in the APR, than with the description in the CA: “The APR cites 3,236 AV. passages, and the number of citations is probably larger than that contained in any other Prātiśākhya. Out of this large number, there are hardly ten passages, where the Vulgate mss. do not follow the sanction, explicit or implicit, of the APR, while there occur hundreds of passages in the CA., where not a single Vulgate ms. follows the sanction of this treatise, besides those typical cases, where CA specifically prescribes a certain saṃdhi for a chosen passage, but that saṃdhi is not carried out in that passage even by a single Vulgate ms.; and this is significant” (APR, Intro., p. 32). 7.3.3.2. For example, consider CA (1.4.3, Whitney 1.94: सोष्मणि पूर्वस्यानूष्मा) and its examples. This rule says that if we have a sequence such as nicakh-kh-nuḥ, the first kh changes to k, and we get the form nicak-kh-nuḥ. Thus, we should get id-dh-ma, and not idh-dh-ma; rurud-dh-re, and not ru- rudh-dh-re. In practice, the manuscripts of the Vulgate do not show forms like nicak-kh-nuḥ. We only get nicakh-nuḥ. Thus, the CA rule is not obeyed by the manuscripts of the Vulgate. Therefore, the Vulgate is not truly Śaunakīya. 7.3.3.3. Another such example is CA (2.1.6, Whitney 2.6: द्वितीयाः शषसेषु). This rule requires that in a combination like godhuk-śete, the final k of the first word be replaced by kh. This doctrine is explicitly ascribed to Śaunaka by VPR (4.119: असस्थाने मुदि द्वितीयं शौनकस्य). However, the manu- scripts of the Vulgate of the AV do not follow this rule, and hence, according to Surya Kanta, the Vulgate is not Śaunakīya. 7.3.3.4. Referring to CA (2.1.9, Whitney 2.9: ङणनेभ्यः कटतैः शषसेषु), Surya Kanta again points out that the Vulgate manuscripts do not show forms like pratyaṅ-k-śete, and concludes: “(1) that CA records sandhis for the Śaunaka AV; (2) that these are not observed by the Vulgate mss.; (3) that the Vulgate does not represent the Śaunaka śākhā, but some other” (APR, Intro., p. 40).

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 85 7.3.4.Argument b: 7.3.4.1. In a number of places, the CA seems to be explaining usages which are not found in the Vulgate text of the AV, and Surya Kanta proposes that such usages must have existed in a genuinely Śaunakīya recension. 7.3.4.2. For example, consider CA rules (1.3.24, Whitney 1.86: हनिगम्योः सनि) and (1.3.25, Whitney 1.87: शान्मान्दानाम्). The first rule refers to desiderative forms of the roots han and gam. While the desiderative of han is attested in the AV, the desiderative of gam is not. Similarly, of the three roots cited in CA (1.1.26, Whitney 1.26), only the desiderative forms for mān are attested in the Vulgate of the AV, but the desideratives of śān and dān are not so attested. Surya Kanta argues that the desiderative forms of gam, śān and dān must have occurred in the original Śaunakīya recension, and their absence in the Vulgate of the AV proves that the Vulgate is not Śaunakīya. 7.3.5. Argument c: 7.3.5.1. The commentary CAB often quotes instances to illustrate the CA rules which are not found in the Vulgate text of the AV. Surya Kanta proposes that such instances must have existed in the genuinely Śaunakīya recension. 7.3.5.2. For example, the CAB on CA (1.1.16, Whitney 1.14-16) quotes an instance which appears in the manuscripts as prāmū ca roha. This is not found in the Vulgate of the AV. Surya Kanta cites this as an example which occurred in the so-called genuine Śaunakīya AV, which is now lost. Whitney, I believe correctly, amends the manuscript reading to prajāṃ ca roha, AV (13.1.34). 7.3.5.2. To cite another example, the CAB on CA (1.1.28, Whitney 1.28) cites an instance punā raktaṃ vāsaḥ, which not attested in the Vulgate of the AV. Surya Kanta asserts that this example comes from the now lost genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV. 7.3.6. Argument d: 7.3.6.1. In some places, the APR explicitly goes against the rules of the CA, and in such cases, the manuscripts of the AV generally seem to be closer to the APR, than the CA. Therefore, the AV as found in the currently available manuscripts does not represent the genuine Śaunakīya recension.

86 INTRODUCTION 7.3.6.2. For example, on CA (2.3.6, Whitney 2.65: कुरुकरंकरत्कृणोतु- कृतिकृधिष्वकर्णयोः), the CAB says: कृणोतु इत्यत्र त्रिधात्विति वक्तव्यम् । ‘दीर्घमायु- ष्कृणोतु’ (अ.वे. ६.७८.३)। ‘अग्निष्कृणोतु भेषजम्’ (अ.वे. ६.१०६.३) । ‘मणिष्कृणोतु देवजाः’ (अ.वे. १०.६.३१). Thus, the CAB says that the change of a visarga to ṣ before kr̥ṇotu occurs [only] in the three listed examples. Referring to the same three instances, the APR (148) says: कृणोत्वित्यत्र त्रिधातु सत्वं न, “There is no change of visarga to s (and then to ṣ) in these three examples.” This would suggest that in the view of the APR, one was expected to maintain a visarga in these cases. Surya Kanta points out that the Vulgate manuscripts follow the APR, and not the CA. Then he concludes that the Vulgate is not a Śaunakīya text. 7.3.6.3. Based upon an extensive examination of the CA, CAB, and the APR, in relation to the existing manuscripts of the AV, Surya Kanta arrives at the following conclusions: 1)The APR belongs to the Vulgate. 2)CA goes with the Śaunaka School 3)the two are not one. Besides these conclusions, Surya Kanta has given a detailed compari- son of the readings for the AV as known to the APR and the readings as known to Sāyaṇa. Sāyaṇa shows hundreds of different readings, “more than 300 readings in the first four Kāṇḍas alone” (APR, Intro., p. 56). Sāyaṇa claims to represent the Śaunakīya version of the AV, and yet these different readings exist in the text known to him. Surya Kanta suggests that one should check the mss. of Sāyaṇa’s commentary to see if they conform to the sanctions of the CA, and then decide whether he really commented on the Śaunakīya recension. In any case, he would like to assert that whatever Śākhā is represented by Sāyaṇa is not the same as the one represented by the APR. 7.4. Surya Kanta’s Conclusions: 7.4.1. Based on the above discussion, we can list below the conclu- sions drawn by Surya Kanta as I understand them. Conclusion 1: The recensions or Saṃhitās, once they were prepared by scholars like Śaunaka, were for all practical pur- poses immutable.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 87 Conclusion 2: The Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā totally reflects the opinions of Śaunaka, and hence the picture of the Saṃhitā gathered from the CA must be viewed as a faithful representa- tion of the original Saṃhitā prepared by Śaunaka. Conclusion 3: The CA was designed to deal exclusively with the linguistic facts of the original Śaunakīya Saṃhitā, and nothing more. Therefore, all usages targeted by the rules of the CA must have existed in the original Śaunaka AV, which is not found in the Vulgate mss. Conclusion 4: The CA and the APR represented different Śākhās of the AV, and are unrelated to each other. Conclusion 5: The CAB is a completely faithful explanation of the CA rules, and does not represent any change. The CAB, like the CA, is a true Śaunakīya text, and that all the examples cited by the CAB must have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya AV. Conclusion 6: Even though Sāyaṇa claims to be commenting on the Śaunakīya AV, his text actually represents a non-Śaunakīya recension. Some of these conclusions have been explicitly articulated by Surya Kanta, while others can be inferred from his arguments. 7.5. Critique of Surya Kanta’s claims and assumptions.5 7.5.1.Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 1: 7.5.1.1. In my opinion, this conclusion is unacceptable. It can be demonstrated that while Pāṇini knew the RV Saṃhitā of Śākalya, the form in which he knew it was not totally identical with the form of the RV Saṃhitā as we know it. The Paippalāda as found in Kashmir and in Orissa shows in-

5In my annotations on the rules of the CA in this critical edition, I have discussed these issues at a number of places. See Notes on the following CA rules: 1.1.10, 1.2.4, 1.2.9, 1.3.15, 1.3.16, 1.3.24, 1.3.25, 2.1.2, 2.1.9, 2.1.12, 2.1.14, 2.1.19, 2.2.1, 2.2.8, 2.2.11, 2.2.12, 2.2.13, 2.3.4, 2.3.6, 2.3.8, 2.3.14, 2.3.15, 2.3.16, 2.3.17, 2.4.6, 3.1.5, 3.1.20, 3.2.10, 3.2.24, 3.2.31, 3.4.5, 3.4.6, 3.4.24, 4.2.16, 4.2.21, and 4.3.13.

88 INTRODUCTION credible variation of detail, and there is every reason to believe that these Saṃhitās underwent change in the process of transmission. S.P. Pandit gives a vivid account of his encounters with a reciter of the AV, Keśava Bhaṭ: “he was more shocked that the several mss. of that Veda … exhibited numerous varieties of reading, and still more horrified when he found that the text he knew by heart and which was as it had been improved by Gaṇeś Bhaṭ Dādā was the worse for improvements.” (AV, VVRI edition, Vol. I, p. xvii). Pandit amply demonstrates how the Vaidikas practised what they called Śuddhī- karaṇa ‘purification, restoration’, and often knew the inherited traditional reading, besides the improved reading. For the Vaidikas, the results of such a Śuddhīkaraṇa did not reflect a change from the original, but, on the contrary, a way of restoring the original. Thus, while in historical terms, a great deal of change occurred in the transmission of a Śākhā, this change was not admitted by the Vaidikas, who continuously tried to restore what they thought was the original. Thus, we cannot maintain any notion of immutability of a Śākhā-text. 7.5.2. Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 2: 7.5.2.1. While the CA does call itself Śaunakīyā, it would not be ap- propriate to assume that it provides a picture of the Saṃhitā as it was originally prepared by Śaunaka himself. The CA claim to the title Śaunakīyā should only be understood to mean that it respects Śaunaka as the founder of its tradition, and that it belongs to that school. When it comes to details, the CA openly admits that it deviates from the opinions of Śaunaka, and hence represents the Śaunakīya tradition as it had changed over a period of time. 7.5.2.2. For instance, consider CA (1.1.10, Whitney 1.8: प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः) and the CAB on this rule: प्रथमान्तानि पदानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य आचार्यस्य प्रतिज्ञानं भवति । न तु वृत्तिः । प्रथमान् तृतीयान् विद्यात् । न तु पठेत् क्वचित् । वृत्तेरननुदर्शनात्. Śaunaka’s doctrine held that the voiceless unaspirated stops, occurring at the end of words, should be changed to voiced unaspirated stops. However, the CA and the CAB both point out that such a doctrine is not to be applied in actual recitation. Inter- estingly, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on this rule refers to Śākaṭāyana’s opinion in the RPR (1.15-16: तस्मादन्यमवसाने तृतीयं गार्ग्यः स्पर्शं प्रथमं शाकटायनः), and states: अत्र वेदे तु प्रथमपद्यो गृह्यते शाकटायनानुसरणात्, “Because [we] follow Śākaṭāyana, in [the recitation of] this Veda, [we] accept the first members of the stop-series as word-final [consonants in prepausal situations].” The lesson to be learned from this comment is that a tradition claiming itself to be in the line of Śaunaka felt no hesitation in occasionally deviating from the opinion of

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 89 Śaunaka, and following the opinions of another scholar like Śākaṭāyana. Thus, the claim that the CA represents the unsullied views of Śaunaka can not be entertained. 7.5.3.Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 3: 7.5.3.1. In most cases, it is true that the rules of the CA deal exclu- sively with the linguistic facts of the AV. However, this is not true in absolute terms. Whitney has pointed out numerous cases, where the CA is venturing into an explanation of the facts of Sanskrit beyond what is attested in the AV. This probably occurred because the author of the CA had before him general treatments of Sanskrit at large, and in many cases he drew upon such gener- alized sources. 7.5.3.2. For example: CA (1.3.25, Whitney 1.87: शान्मान्दानाम्). While the rule relates to the desiderative forms of three roots, only the forms of mān are attested in ŚAV. However, these three roots are also grouped together in P.3.1.6 (मान्बधदान्शान्भ्यो दीर्घश्चाभ्यासस्य), and it is very likely that the CA rule was based on a concern for the general grammar of Sanskrit. 7.5.3.3. Consider CA (3.4.24, Whitney 3.92: क्षुभ्नादीनाम्). This rule refers to a Gaṇa, the Kṣubhnādigaṇa, and says that in these forms the n does not change to ṇ. However, no forms of kṣubh where this would be applicable are available in the ŚAV. But notice that Pāṇini 8.4.39 (क्षुभ्नादिषु च) prescribes the same thing and refers to the same Gaṇa. Thus, it is safer to assume that occasionally the CA was drawing upon generalized grammars of Sanskrit, and hence occasionally its rules extend beyond the linguistic facts of the AV. 7.5.4.Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 4: 7.5.4.1. This argument is unacceptable for numerous reasons. As Surya Kanta himself notes, several Gaṇas referred to in the CA by the first instance are fully listed in the APR with the same first instance. Similarly, in 95 percent of the cases, the examples quoted in the CAB are simply the first few instances of long lists found in the APR. This could not have occurred unless these two texts were somehow genetically linked. 7.5.4.2. Surya Kanta himself notes that the mss. of the APR are mostly found in the same bundles which also contain the text of the CA, as well as many clearly Śaunakīya texts. The colophons in these ms. bundles indicate that these mss. were copied, preserved and studied by Śaunakīya families (e.g. the Pañcolī family of Gujarat), and the texts of the Vulgate also

90 INTRODUCTION largely come from these same families. Thus, the Śaunakīyas preserved and studied both of these texts and they also preserved the Vulgate text of the AV, and saw no contradiction. 7.5.4.3. The few cases, where the APR explicitly rejects the formulation of the CA, and where the mss. of the Vulgate follow the APR should be accounted for by resorting to linguistic change within a given tradition over a period of time. Such for instance is the case of CA (2.3.6, Whitney 2.65: कुरुकरंकरत्कृणोतुकृतिकृधिष्वकर्णयोः). As discussed earlier, the CAB says that the change of visarga to s (and then to ṣ) before kr̥ṇotu occurs only in three instances. However, the APR (148) says that one does not change the visarga to s (and then to ṣ) in these three cases. It is possible to account for these statements as reflecting a possible historical development. 7.5.4.4. Whitney, on this rule, says: “In all these (= three) passages, however, the manuscripts read, without dissent, visarjanīya before the k. … Other instances in which kr̥ṇotu has an unaltered visarjanīya before it are tolerably numerous.” Thus, instead of simply talking about two different re- censions represented by these two texts, one could make a better case for a possible historical change within the same tradition: 1) CA - Unconditional change of visarjanīya to s before kr̥ṇotu. 2) CAB - This change occurs only in three instances. 3) APR - The above change does not occur in any instances. 7.5.4.5. Such a general direction of possible change in the oral text is further supported by the following observations of W.S. Allen (1953: 51): “In later, though still ancient, times there appears to have been a tendency for -ḥ to extend its usage to contexts other than in pausa. The earliest of these extensions was to the position before the initial fricatives ś-, ṣ-, s-, where it replaced the homorganic final -ś, -ṣ, -s (indraś śūraḥ > indraḥ śūraḥ, &c). This practice was then extended to the position before the velar and labial voiceless stops: in connexion with this innovation we find mentioned the names of Āgniveśya, Vālmīki, Śākalya, and the Mādhyandina school, whilst the ancient grammarian Śākaṭāyana is quoted as holding to the more conservative practice.” Allen also refers to A.H. Fry’s view that “the spread of -ḥ was due to the writers of Classical Sanskrit operating with a phonemic orthography.” The last comment is especially significant, since we are dealing with relatively late manuscripts for editing our texts.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 91 7.5.5.Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 5: 7.5.5.1. There is no reason to believe that the CAB is a totally faithful interpretation of the CA and that it does not add anything to the CA reflecting either historical change in the transmitted text of the Śaunakīya AV, or new influences from other grammatical traditions such as that of Pāṇini. 7.5.5.2. The discussion in the previous section shows a possibility of a gap between the views held by the CA and the CAB. Here is another example. On CA (2.3.3, Whitney 2.62: समासे सकारः कपयोरनन्तःसद्यःश्रेय- श्छन्दसाम्), the CAB first discusses all the instances directly referred to by the CA rule, and finally adds: परः परः । पर इति चाम्रेडितसमासे न सकारो भवति। ‘त्वत् परः परः’ (अ.वे. १२.३.३९). This added instance is not covered by the list of exceptions in the CA rule itself. However, it is covered by the APR (201). Thus, it is possible that this exception was not intended by the author of the CA, but developed later on and was accounted for by both the CAB and the APR. 7.5.5.3. In very many cases, the CAB offers lists of examples which are not found in the AV, but are taken most probably from the Pāṇinian com- mentaries like the KV. I have already discussed a number of such examples above in section 6.9.3. Considering the profusion of such non-AV Pāṇinian examples in the CAB, one cannot agree with Surya Kanta that every example cited by the CAB, not found in the Vulgate of the AV, must have occurred in the so-called genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV. I must also point out that Whitney had already cited all these Pāṇinian examples from the CAB in his edition of the CA. However, Surya Kanta remains totally silent about all these examples. If the CAB can cite all these examples, there is no reason to assume that every example cited by the CAB must be a genuine AV example. Even an example like पुना रक्तं वासः in the CAB on CA (1.1.28, Whitney 1.28) which is not traced in the AV, and is ascribed by Surya Kanta to his genuine Śaunakīya recension, is found in the KV on P.1.3.14 (रो रि), and could have been taken from such a Pāṇinian commentary. 7.5.6.Critique of Surya Kanta’s Conclusion 6: 7.5.6.1. At the very beginning of his Bhāṣya on the first Kāṇḍa of the AV, Sāyaṇa says: शाखायाः शौनकीयायाः पूर्वोक्तेष्वेव कर्मसु । विनियोगाभिधानेन संहितार्थः प्रकाश्यते ॥

92 INTRODUCTION “The meaning of the Saṃhitā of the Śaunakīya branch shall be explained by pointing out its application in the ritual actions mentioned earlier.” This makes it clear that in his own opinion, Sāyaṇa was commenting on the Śaunakīya recension and none other. We should be willing to accept a strong possibility that, like the separate textual transmission of the Paippalāda recension in different regions of India, the Śaunakīya recension also underwent slightly divergent developments in different parts, cf. Mishra, R.C. 1984. These different sub-schools were not always in touch with each other, and probably underwent independent Śuddhīkaraṇa ‘purification / restoration’ (and a-Śuddhīkaraṇa for that matter) in different regions. As it has been shown by Vishva Bandhu and Pandit, such regional traits are manifest in the manuscripts of the AV. “Looking to the nature of the several MSS., I group them as follows: A, B, C, D, E, R, Sm, Cs, P, P2, J, and Cp, come from Gujarat, though not from the same original source. They are untainted by any attempts to revise the tradition of the text and probably represented the original form of the true tradition of the text. Bp, Bh, K, Km, V, and Dc, are on the other hand representatives of the Atharvaveda as it was revised in the Deccan; where it was introduced about 160 years ago, under the influence of the school of the R̥gvedins and was further subjected to changes in relation to the text of Sāyaṇācārya by Gaṇeś Bhaṭ Dādā after his visit to Śriṅgeri, and his discovery there of Sāyaṇa’s commentary” (AV, VVRI edition, Vol. I, Intro., p. xxvi). 7.5.6.2. It is also clear that the late commentators of the CA, Bhārgava-Bhāskara and Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, were unaware of the existence of CAB, and were working not on CA, but on what they called Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa. Generally speaking, the CA manuscripts are located in the regions of Gujarat and Rajasthan. The manuscripts which call their text Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa are generally located in Ujjain and Deccan. Not a single manuscript of the CA has been found in the southern parts of India. As Pandit’s introduction shows, the Deccan tradition of the AV became aware of Sāyaṇa’s commentary at a very late time, when a Maharashtrian AV reciter visited Śriṅgerī and then became aware of its existence. It is also not unlikely that the southern tradition of the

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 93 Śaunakīya AV was not aware of the existence of the CA and its commentaries. Sāyaṇa’s commentary, which refers to Pāṇini and later grammarians in that tradition hundreds of times, does not refer either to CA or to APR even once. Thus, one can make a probable assumption that the text-tradition of the Śaunakīya AV received by him was not in contact with either the CA or the APR. However, for that reason, one need not discard his claim that he too was working with ‘a’ Śaunakīya tradition. 7.6. Surya Kanta’s ‘star example’ Re-examined. 7.6.1. Surya Kanta (APR, Intro., p. 42) points to a passage in the APR which proves conclusively to him that the currently preserved text of the AV is not that of the true Śaunakīya Saṃhitā. This is a dual reference in APR (140c) and (3g) to the passage tannastapaḥ (AV 12.3.12). The question is whether this should be understood as a combination of taṃ naḥ or tat naḥ. APR (140c: तन्निष्कुरु तन्निदध्मस्तन्नो भूमे तन्नस्तपस्तन्निर्दहत तन्नो गोपायतास्माकमिति षण्मकारान्तानि नकाराबाधे) refers to this passage and says that tannas should be analyzed as tam naḥ. Referring to the same passage, APR (3g) says: शाखान्त- रेऽपि । तन्नस्तपः । अकारान्तं पुंसि वचनम् । नपुंसकं तकारान्तं शौनके।. Surya Kanta (APR, Intro., p. 42) translates this passage as: “Also in another śākhā of the AV; tan nas tapaḥ (12.3.12); tat, masc., nom. sing. ends in a (= saḥ); the same in neut. ends in t; (this is so found) in the school of Śaunaka.” For Surya Kanta, “The wording is explicit. Śaunakas read in the Pada tat naḥ, against tam naḥ of the APrŚ. APr. 140c and 3g taken together give: - 1. tam naḥ; APrŚ.; so SPP. with all his authorities. 2. tat naḥ, Śaunakas; so Whitney with all his mss.” 7.6.2. What does this passage mean? One must concede that it refers to an observed difference in the recitation of the Padapāṭha, and that the reading tat naḥ is ascribed by the author of the APR to a tradition described as Śaunaka. However, this does not and should not be taken to mean that the reading tat naḥ belongs to the so-called pure genuine Śaunakīya Saṃhitā which is now lost. It in fact does not refer to the view of Śaunaka, or directly to the Padapāṭha as constituted by Śaunaka, but to the tradition as constituted by the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā. This is clear from CA (1.1.10, Whitney 1.8: प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः) and the commentaries CAB and Bhārgava-Bhāskara-Vr̥tti. It was Śaunaka’s doctrine that the words ending in the first members of the stop-series should be recited as ending in the third members, e.g. tad / naḥ. However, the rule and the commentaries inform us that such was no longer the practice, and that in the recitation as it was

94 INTRODUCTION known to the author of the CA, the words were to be recited as ending in the first members of the stop-series, e.g. tat / naḥ. Bhārgava-Bhāskara, in his commentary on CA 1.1.10, clearly ascribes the practice of the followers of the CA to the doctrine of Śākaṭāyana: अत्र वेदे तु प्रथमपद्यो गृह्यते शाकटायनानुसरणात्. Thus, it is clear that the word śaunaka as used in APR (3g) refers not to some Ur-Śaunakīya recension, now lost, as assumed by Surya Kanta, but to the followers of the CA, who had openly diverged from the genuine doctrine of Śaunaka. Additionally, as Surya Kanta notes himself, these two views, e.g. tam naḥ versus tat naḥ, continued to manifest in the manuscripts of the Vulgate of the AV, and it is not the case that the manuscripts of the Vulgate took no notice of the view ascribed to śaunaka by the APR. What this suggests is a picture of a diversified recitational tradition of the Śaunakīya Saṃhitā. While it is perfectly appropriate to say that the reading taṃ naḥ was not followed by the adherents of the CA, the texts as we have them do not distinguish these readings as some being Śaunakīya and others as non-Śaunakīya. 7.7. Need for a new approach to the study of the transmission of the Veda 7.7.1. To conclude, I would like to say that in order to have a realistic notion of what happened to the Vedic Saṃhitās as they were transmitted over centuries in different regions of India, one needs to give up certain stereotypes regarding the nature of the transmission of the Vedic texts. One need not belittle the enormous efforts made by the Vaidikas to transmit these texts without change. However, our critical assessment must not be swayed by such respect. The Vaidikas who transmitted the Śaunakīya Saṃhitā never thought that they were changing anything, and yet change did indeed take place. When they did change something, either this change was unconscious change, or they thought that they were purifying the text and were restoring the pristine original. The CA, the CAB, the APR, the various manuscripts, and Sāyaṇa’s commentary must all be looked at for traces of what transpired during this long and diversified process of transmission. All these sources are changing manifestations of the Śaunakīya textual tradition and there is no need to deny the title ‘Śaunakīya’ to any one of them. Moving away from the unreachable goal of reaching the Ur-form of the Śaunakīya text, or any other Vedic text for that matter, we should look at the changing vicissitudes of a Vedic tradition more carefully. Here, we are more likely to find a realistic historical picture of what real Vaidikas, copyists, reciters, and interpreters did to a text, which had no independent existence from what these custodians did to it. This is all the

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 95 more significant in the case of the transmission of the Atharvaveda. For reasons which we cannot discuss here in great detail, the population of Vaidikas who pursued the Atharvavedic traditions is minuscule at present, in comparison with the followers of the R̥gveda and Yajurveda, and there is reason to believe that it was so even in the past. This may have to do with the historically traceable lower status given to the Atharvaveda by the other traditions reflected in its early exclusion from the Trayī, and probably also due to the Ābhicārika rites practiced by the Atharvavedic priests. This is analogous to the social relations of the Brahmaṇa families who perform the funerary rites, and the refusal of even the Atharvavedic reciters to recite the funerary hymns of the Atharvaveda as noted by Pandit. It is indeed the case that the Atharvaveda that we possess today comes to us from extremely limited sources. Most manuscripts found in the Gujarat area seem in fact to point to one single prominent Atharvavedic family, the Pañcolis. From the manuscript colophons alone one can reconstruct several generations of Pañcolis involved in the transmission of the Atharvaveda. With very small numbers of reciters, and often the reciters of the other Vedas taking over the recitation of the Atharvaveda to cater to the demand for the Ābhicārika rites (as reported to me by the late Pt. Nārāyaṇa Śāstrī Raṭāṭe of Banaras), the transmission has indeed suffered through the ages, and hence the Atharvaveda material we possess is in a relatively less authentic state in comparison with other Vedic traditions. In any case, we possess enough material to trace the development of the Atharvaveda transmission in various regions of Western and Southern India. Any detailed discussion of such efforts lies clearly outside the scope of this Introduction. However, the interpretation and the transmission of the CA and the transmission of the Śaunakīya Atharvaveda have been closely related to each other, and this edition hopes to further a clearer understanding of these relations. __________________________________

॥ शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका ॥ ॥ प्रथमोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ प्रथमः पादः ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॐ नमः सरस्वत्यै नमः । ॐ नमो ब्रह्मवेदाय । भार्गवभास्करवृत्ति - श्रीगणेशाय नमः । अथाथर्ववेदाङ्ग- कौत्सव्याकरणस्य चतुराध्यायात्मकस्य वृत्तिप्रारम्भे ग्रन्थप्रयो- जनाद्युपोद्घातं समाम्नायाग्रे सूत्रविवरणं कर्तुमिच्छुः प्रथमा- ध्यायस्य प्रथमपादसूत्राणि भार्गवो भास्करो विवृणोति । ग्रन्थमध्ये मङ्गलं करोति अस्खलितवृत्तिपरिपूर्त्यथर्म् - श्वेताङ्गं शुक्लवस्त्रं करिवरवदनं भालचन्द्रं सुरेशं मुक्ताहारैर्निवीतं दशशतवदनाभोगसंलग्नमध्यम् ॥ ऋद्ध्या सिद्ध्या च देव्या मणिगणजटितोद्दण्डयुक्चामराभ्यां नित्यं संवीज्यमानं सुखदमु(?) भजतां सर्वदानं नमामि ॥१॥ हरिः ॥ ॐ ३ ॥ १.१.१. अथाङ्गिरसः । Absent in Whitney. Found in E, F, G, H, I, N, and O. G: 1.1.1. Translation: Thus [begin the phonetic doctrines in relation to the Veda] of the Aṅgiras. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - H and N list this rule without any comment.

98अध्याय १, पाद १ भार्गवभास्करवृत्ति - श्रीमद्भगवतोऽङ्गरसात्समुत्पन्ना अङ्गिरस ऋषयः । तथा च गोपथब्राह्मणम् - ‘ताया अमू रेतः समुद्रम्’ (गोपथब्राह्मणम्, पूर्वभाग, १.७) इति खण्डोक्त- तात्पर्यम् । ब्रह्मतो जलसमुद्रवरुणा जाता मृत्युश्च । ‘तद्ब्रह्म पुनरभ्यतपत्तस्य श्रान्तस्य सन्तप्तस्य सर्वेभ्योऽङ्गेभ्यो रसोऽक्षरत् सोऽङ्गर …’[missing text] Note: The incomplete quotation in the Bhārgava-Bhāskara-Vr̥tti is from the Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa (Pūrvabhāga, 1.7, p.6): तं वरुणं मृत्युमभ्यश्रामयदभ्यतपत्सम- तपत् । तस्य श्रान्तस्य तप्तस्य सन्तप्तस्य सर्वेभ्योऽङ्गेभ्यो रसोऽक्षरत् । सोऽङ्गरसोऽभवत् । तं वा एतमङ्गरसं सन्तमङ्गिरा इत्याचक्षते परोक्षेण । परोक्षप्रिया इव हि देवा भवन्ति प्रत्यक्षद्विषः । १.१.२. चतुर्णां पदजातानां नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातानां सन्ध्यपद्यौ गुणौ प्रातिज्ञम् । Whitney (1.1). Found in B, D, E, F, Hb, I, J, K, L, Nab, O, and P. Translation: Here are defined the [phonetic/phonological] characteristics of nouns, verbs, prepositions, and particles, the four types of words, as they occur in combination [with the following words, as in the Saṃhitāpāṭha] and before pause [or in isolation, as in the Padapāṭha]. Note: The word prātijñam refers to the notion of pratijñāna (cf. CA 1.1.10), and this refers to a doctrine or a view explicitly held or stated by a teacher, in contrast with vr̥tti “recitational practice.” In most cases, the pratijñā and the vr̥tti are expected to agree with each other. However, this is not always the case. There is a general expectation that the Prātiśākhyas take the existence of the Padapāṭha for granted and then teach the rules for converting the Padapāṭha into Saṃhitāpāṭha. Such an expectation is created by the statement पदप्रकृतिः संहिता (NR 1.17; RPR 2.1: संहिता पदप्रकृतिः). This statement is inter- preted in two opposite ways. The first interpretation is that the Saṃhitāpāṭha is the basis for the Padapāṭha. This is historically valid, since the Padapāṭha is an analysis of the words of the Saṃhitāpāṭha. However, the more commonly accepted interpretation is that the Saṃhitāpāṭha has the Padapāṭha for its basis, i.e. the Saṃhitāpāṭha is derived by applying the rules of Sandhi to the Pada- pāṭha. With this interpretation in mind, one expects the Prātiśākhyas to provide

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका99 rules for converting the Padapāṭha into the Saṃhitāpāṭha, and not the other way around. However, as Whitney (1862: 10) notes: “Our own work gives in its fourth chapter the rules for the construction of the pada-text itself, as does also the Vājasaneyi Prātiśākhya.” This is more in line with the neutral statement of the present rule. It lays equal emphasis on the sandhya characteristics, as well as the padya characteristics. This is clear in its use of the dual forms: सन्ध्यपद्यौ गुणौ (प्रातिज्ञम्). In general, the Prātiśākhyas are not concerned with the full derivation of grammatical forms, as are the grammars of Sanskrit. This contrast is brought out by the commentary Caturādhyāyībhāṣya. Also see Whitney’s comments on TPR (3.1, pp. 82ff): “In the other treatises (Rik Pr vii.-ix., Vāj. Pr. iii. 95-128, Ath. Pr. iii.1-25), the rules tell us in what situations a vowel originally short is lengthened: This is more in accordance with the general method of the Prātiśākhyas, which take for granted, upon the whole, the existence of their Śākhās in the analyzed condition of the pada-text, and proceed to construct the saṃhitā from it. Here, on the contrary, we are told what vowels, long in the ordinary text, are to be shortened when thrown out of combination with their surroundings. Such dissolution of the continuity of the text takes place, first, in pada, whenever a pause - either the avagraha sepa- rating the two members of a compound, in its repetition after iti, or the longer pause that divides between two words - comes to stand between the vowel in question and the consonant which was its next neighbour in saṃhitā.” I thank Prof. Cardona for drawing my attention to this section of the TPR. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सन्ध्यश्च गुणः पद्यश्च तत् प्रातिज्ञं मन्यन्ते । सन्ध्यो नाम एवमन्तानि पदानि एवमादिषु एवं भवती(न्ती?)ति । पद्यो नाम(H, N: मा) प्रथमान्तानि लिङ्गानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः । सन्ध्यपद्याविति किमर्थम् । ‘लीढ’मित्यत्र हो ढत्वम् (cf. ‘हो ढः,’ पा. ८.२.३१)। पर(H, N: °द, Whitney: °र)चतुर्थ- त्वम् (cf. ‘झषस्तथोर्धोऽधः,’ पा. ८.२.४०)। ष्टुना ष्टुत्वम् (cf. ‘ष्टुना ष्टुः,’ पा. ८.४.४१)। ढो ढे लोपो (cf. ‘ढो ढे लोपः,’ पा. ८.३.१३) दीर्घत्वमिति (cf. ‘ढ्रलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घोऽणः,’ पा. ६.३.१११) वैयाकरणेन वक्तव्यम् ।

100अध्याय १, पाद १ Note: Whitney (1862: 11) expresses some doubt as to whether the commentator here refers to Pāṇini or to some other authority. The expressions used are so obviously Pāṇinian, that we need not entertain any such doubt. The CAB is fully conversant with Pāṇini, and by the term vyākaraṇa, it refers to Pāṇini alone. Compare the CAB on the next rule. This need not mean that the CA itself necessarily presupposes Pāṇini. However, the commentatorial tradition is firmly rooted in the awareness of Pāṇini’s grammar as the grammar par excellence. १.१.३. एवमिहेति च । Whitney (1.2), Ha, I, Na: एवमिहेति च विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये. B, D, E, F, J, K, L, M, O and P: एवमिहेति च । विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये । Translation: [This treatise] also [defines that the phonetic/ phonological features of the words] in this [tradition] are such and such. Note: Whitney combines this rule with the following one in a single rule, following the CAB. However, having done that, he still feels that the rule is “somewhat obscure and of difficult construction” (Whitney 1862, p. 11). He then refers to Max MÜller’s rendering of this rule (M. MÜller, RPR, p. xii): “what by the grammatical text books is left free, that is here thus and thus, so says the Prātiśākhya.” Whitney criticizes this interpretation by saying that “it leaves the ca unexplained, and supposes the iti to be in another place, making the rule to read rather evam iha vibhāṣāprāptaṃ sāmānya iti; … It seems necessary, in order to account for ca, to bring down prātijñam as general predicate from the preceding rule; and the iti must be understood as pointing out that the Prātiśākhya says evam iha, ‘so and so is proper here,’ respecting any matter which the rules of grammar leave doubtful” (Whitney, 1862, p. 11). Whitney is correct in bringing down the word prātijñam from the previous rule to give a better account of ca in this rule. However, such an interpretation fits better if the portion ending in ca is a separate rule, as the majority of mss. now indicate. Additionally, the rule is not obscure, and its interpretation is further assisted by the fact of it being quoted by Uvaṭa in his introduction to the RPR (M.D. Shastri edn., Part II, p. 23) in a discussion of the exact relation between the Prātiśākhya tradition and the tradition of grammar. However, Whitney does make a problematic statement: “it (= CA) does not at all imply or base itself upon the general science of grammar and its text book, but is an independent and a complete treatise as regards its own subject.” While it is an

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका101 independent treatise, it clearly assumes the prior existence of general grammars of Sanskrit, and seems to imply that it is related to the general science of grammar as a statement of particular features of a Veda branch would relate to a generic description of Sanskrit at large. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एवम् इह इति च । अस्यां शाखायां तत् प्रातिज्ञं (H, N: न्यं, Whitney: ज्ञं) मन्यन्ते । ‘यरोऽनु- नासिकेऽनुनासिको वा’ (पा. ८.४.४५) इति विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये । किं सामान्यम् । व्याकरणम् । वक्ष्यति ‘उत्तमा उत्तमेषु’ (च.आ. २.१.५) इति । ‘ऋध॑ङ्मन्त्रो॒ योनि॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५.१.१)। ‘य उ॒दान॒ण्न्याय॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ६.७७.२)। ‘अ॑र्ण॒वान्म॑ह॒तस्परि॑’ (अ.वे. १.१०.४)। ‘म॒दुघा॒न्मधु॑मत्तरः’ (अ.वे. १.३४.४.)। ‘मध्या॑न्नी॒चै(ः,’ अ.वे. ४.१.३)। ‘य स्ता॒यन् मन्य॑ते॒’ (अ.वे. ४.१६.१.)। ‘त्रिष्टुम्नयति’ (not in AV, fabricated example cited in KV on P.8.4.45)। १.१.४. विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये । A combines this with पदांतः पद्यः. Translation: [These phonetic/phonological features of the words] obtain optionally in a generic [grammar of Sanskrit]. Note: This rule contrasts the function of a generic grammar of Sanskrit with that of a Prātiśākhya. A Prātiśākhya ideally aims at strictly de- scribing the linguistic features of words as they occur in a particular Vedic Saṃhitā text, and , therefore, it is expected to be highly specific. A general grammar of Sanskrit, on the other hand, is expected to cover all the different textual traditions and dialects of colloquial Sanskrit, and hence it ends up making optional statements. This precisely accords with Patañjali’s explana- tion as to why Pāṇini was forced to use different option-terms. (सर्ववेदपारिषदं हीदं शास्त्रं तत्र नैकः पन्थाः शक्य आस्थातुम्, MB on P.2.1.58 and P.6.3.14). Also see Uvaṭa’s introductory comments on the first Paṭala of the RPR (M.D. Shastri edn., Vol.II, p. 23):

102अध्याय १, पाद १ शिक्षाच्छन्दोव्याकरणैः सामान्येनोक्तलक्षणम् । तदेवमिह शाखायामिति शास्त्रप्रयोजनम् । प्रातिशाख्यप्रयोजनमनेन श्लोकेनोच्यते । शिक्षादिभिर्यत्सामान्येनोत्सर्र्गेेणोक्तं लक्षणं, यथा तावच्छिक्षायां - ‘स्युर्मूर्धन्या ऋटुरषाः’ - सामान्येन सर्व- शाखासु रेफो मूर्धन्य इत्युक्तः । … एवं सर्वा शिक्षा वर्णेषु स्थानकरणानु- प्रदानादि सर्वासु शाखासु विदधाति; न तु नियमतः कस्यां शाखायां रेफो मूर्धन्यः कस्यां दन्तमूलीय इति । अत एतद्व्यवस्थापकमारभ्यते । … तथा व्याकरणे यत्सामान्येन, यथा ‘ऋचि तुनुघमक्षुतङ्कुत्रोरुष्याणाम्’ (पा. ६.१.१३३) इति । तद्व्यवस्थापयितुमिदमारभ्यते । न सर्वत्रैतानि पदा- न्यस्यां शाखायां दीर्घाणि भवन्ति । एवं शिक्षाच्छन्दोव्याकरणैर्यत्सर्वासु शाखासु सामान्येन लक्षणमुच्यते तदेवास्यां शाखायामनेन व्यवस्थाप्यते इत्ये- तत् प्रयोजनमस्याङ्गस्य । तथा चाथर्वणप्रातिशाख्ये इदमेव प्रयोजनमुक्तम् - ‘एवमिहेति च विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्येन’ । अस्य सूत्रस्यायमर्थः - सामान्येन लक्षणेन यद् विकल्पप्राप्तं तदेवमस्यां शाखायां व्यवस्थितं भवतीति प्राति- शाख्यप्रयोजनमुक्तम् । चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - See the commentary on the previous rule. १.१.५. पदान्तः पद्यः । Whitney (1.3), Hab, I, Nab, O: पदान्त्यः पद्यः. A, B, D, E, F, J, K, L, M, P: °दांतः°. Translation: A sound occurring at the end of a word [i.e. a pada in the Padapāṭha] is termed padya. Note: As Whitney (1862: 12) points out, the term padya is “not found at all in either of the Yajur-Veda Prātiśākhyas, or in Pāṇini, and in the Rik Prātiśākhya it means ‘member of a compound word.’” By its etymology, the word would simply mean ‘belonging to a pada,’ and hence the need for a precise definition. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्त्यो वर्णः पद्यो भवति । ‘गो॒धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒षत्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका103 १.१.६. अन्ऌकारः स्वरः पद्यः । Whitney (1.4): अन्ऌकारः°. A, B, D, E, F, Hab, I, J, L, M, Nab, O, P: °नृ°. Translation: [Any] vowel, other than l̥, may occur at the end of a word. Note: All the manuscripts share the mistaken reading अनृकारः. How- ever, I agree with Whitney’s reading. As the CAB clearly shows, the only excluded vowel is l̥. Whitney (1862: 12) provides information on how several other Prātiśākhyas also exclude l̥ from the sounds which may occur at the end of words, i.e. padas in the Padapāṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्ऌकारः स्वरः पद्यो भवति । ‘ब्रह्म॑’ (H: ह्मा, Whitney: ह्म, अ.वे. १.१०.४)। ‘शाला॑’ (अ.वे. ९.३.१७)। ‘नीला’ (not found in AV)। ‘दधि’ (‘दधि॑- वान्,’ अ.वे. १८.४.१७)। ‘कु॒मा॒री’ (अ.वे. १०.८.२७)। ‘मधु॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२)। ‘वायू’ (‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू’, अ.वे. ३. २०.६)। ‘कर्तृ’ (Whitney: no such case in AV, … take instead pitr̥bhiḥ, e.g. vi.63.3; pitr̥lokam, xviii.4.64)। ‘च॑क्षते’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.२६)। ‘अ॒स्यै’ (H, N: स्ये, Whitney: स्यै. अ.वे. २.३६.१)। ‘वायो॑’ (अ.वे. २.२०.१)। ‘तौ’ (अ.वे. ३. २४.७)। Note: While the ms. H reads brahmā, the ms. N reads brahma, and this is the reading chosen by Whitney. It seems to be the correct reading in view of the fact that the commentary is clearly offering examples of short and long vowels in a fixed sequence. This would make the reading brahmā unsuitable. The word nīlam is found in AV (14.2.48), and nīlena is found in AV (15.1.8). However, the VVRI concordance does not record any occur- rence of nīlā in the Vedic Saṃhitās. Whitney (1862: 12) appropriately notes that r̥ appears only at the end of the first member of a compound, or before a case affix, but not exactly at the end of inflected words. This reminder is important in view of the fact that the word pada, though not defined in this text,

104अध्याय १, पाद १ applies not only to inflected nominal and verbal items, it also covers nominal bases as they appear in compounds and before certain case terminations. The Padapāṭha typically separates members of compounds, and nominal bases before bh- initial case terminations and -su. The sound r̥ does appear in such environments, and, therefore, it is legitimately a padya sound. १.१.७. लकारविसर्जनीयौ च । Whitney (1.5). Translation: [The sounds] l and ḥ may also [occur at the end of words]. Note: As Whitney (1862: 13) points out, the RPR (xii.1) and the VPR (i.86) omit l from the list of pada-final sounds. The other two AV words ending in l are śal and phal “in xx. 135.2, 3, a part of the text of which our treatise takes no account” (Whitney, 1862: 13). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - लकारविसर्जनीयौ च पद्यौ भवतः । ‘बाल्’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘वृ॒क्षः’ (अ.वे. ४.७.५)। १.१.८. स्पर्शाः प्रथमोत्तमाः । Whitney (1.6). Translation: The first and the last [members in each series of] stops [may also occur at the end of words]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्पर्शाः प्रथमाश्च उत्तमाश्च वर्गाणां पद्या भवन्ति । कचटतपाः । ङञणनमाः । Note: In listing the possible pada-final stops, the commentary includes c and ñ. This inclusion must be canceled by the very next rule, which says that members of the c-series cannot occur pada-finally. Whitney (1862: 13) gives a detailed account of which stops are more or less frequent in the pada-final position. Also compare: VPR (i. 85), and RPR (xii. 1).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका105 १.१.९. न चवर्गः । Whitney (1.7). B, D, P: °चवर्ग्रः. Translation: [But] not the [members of the] c-series. Note: Since only the firsts and the lasts of the stop-series qualify to occur at the end of words according to CA 1.1.8, one needs to exclude only c and ñ, and not the whole c-series. Perhaps the expression cavargaḥ is felt to be more economical as compared to the expression cakārañakārau. The notion of economy often applies at the level of expression, rather than reference. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न चवर्गः पद्यो भवति । चछजझञ । भा.भा.वृत्ति - [ms G resumes with folio 4a] नां मध्ये अष्टावेव पद्याः। ‘हिरु॑क्’ (अ.वे. ४.३.१)। ‘प्र॒त्यङ्’ (अ.वे. ३.२०.२)। ‘तु॒रा॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। ‘शी॒र्ष॒- ण्व॒तीम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १६.३५.२)। ‘वी॒रुत्’ (अ.वे. १.३४. १)। ‘पि॒तॄन्’ (अ.वे. ५.३०.१)। ‘अ॒नु॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९. २०)। ‘स॒हस्र॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.१०.२)। Note: The incomplete initial word of the Bhārgava-Bhāskara-Vr̥tti is most likely sparśānām. Thus, the commentary makes it explicit, that among the stops, only eight stops may occur at the end of the padas. Concerning the word-final ṅ, Whitney (1862: 13) points out that it “appears only as final of masculine nominatives singular of derivatives of the root añc.” Note that Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s example is pratyaṅ. The example śīrṣaṇ-vatīm offered by Bhārgava-Bhāskara is important, because, as Whitney (1862: 13) notes: “ṇ, [occurs] only in a few instances, at the end of the first member of a compound, where, by a specific rule (iv. 99 = CA 4.3.28), it is left in the pada in its saṃhitā form.” Whitney himself came up with the example ब्रह्म॑ण्वतीम् (ŚAV vi.108.2). It is difficult to see why Bhārgava-Bhāskara could not find an example in the ŚAV. The form शी॒र्ष॒ण्वती॑, not शीर्षण्वतीम्, is attested in ŚAV (10.1.2).

106अध्याय १, पाद १ १.१.१०. प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः । Whitney (1.8). J, K, L: प्रथमांतानि तृतीयांतानीति । शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः । A, L: तृतीयातानीति. B, D: प्रतिज्ञानं न्न. Ha, Na: वृर्तिः. G: 1.1.10. I: 1.10. Translation: It is a precept of Śaunaka that the words (= padas) ending in the first [members of the stop-series, i.e. voiceless unaspirated stops, should rather] end in the third [members, i.e. voiced unaspirated stops]. [Such, however, is] not the [recitational] practice. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रथमान्तानि पदानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्याचार्यस्य प्रतिज्ञानं भवति । न तु वृत्तिः । ‘गो॒- धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒- षत्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। ‘मावसानानिकान्स्पर्शान्प(W: आ?)द्यानननुनासिकान्। प्रथमान् (H, N: मां, Whitney: मान्) तृतीयान् (H, N: यां, Whitney: यान्, Whitney: प्रथमान्तं तृतीयान्तं?) विद्यात् न तु पठेत् क्वचित् ॥’(Source.?) वृत्तेरननुदर्शनात् । Note: The verse quoted in the commentary comes to us in a mutilated form. A related verse or a version of the same verse appears to have strayed into the text of this commentary on the next rule. This intrusion appears only in the manuscript H. The intruding passage reads: का(H: जा)दीन् मावसितान् स्पर्शान् पद्यानननुनासिकान् । तृतीयान् शौनकमतात् … The last statement of the com- mentary, i.e. वृत्तेरननुदर्शनात् looks like a quarter of a missing Anuṣṭubh verse. भा.भा.वृत्ति - यानि वर्गप्रथमान्तानि पदानि तानि तृतीया- न्तान्यपि पद्यानि भवन्तीति । शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं मतभेदा- ङ्गीकारः । न तु वृत्तिः। तृतीयान्तः पदान्त इति वर्तनं न करोति । वृत्तिस्तु प्रथमान्तस्यैवाङ्गीकारे तथैव । ऋक्प्राति- शाख्ये शौनकः - ‘तस्मादन्यमवसाने तृतीयं गार्ग्यः स्पर्शं

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका107 प्रथमं शाकटायनः’ (ऋ.प्रा. १.१५-१६) इति । पाणिनीये तु ‘वावसाने’ (पा. ८.४.५६) इति विकल्पः । अत्र वेदे तु प्रथमपद्यो गृह्यते शाकटायनानुसरणात् । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara adds some important information, namely that while the CA mentions the opinion of Śaunaka, it does not follow its prac- tice, and that the practice of the AV tradition follows the view of Śākaṭāyana. In view of the fact that we are dealing with the so-called Śaunakīya AV, it is curious to find that the surviving tradition follows the view, not of Śaunaka, but that of Śākaṭāyana. While the CA mentions Śākaṭāyana’s views in other contexts, e.g. CA 2.1.24 (लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य), it does not do so in this case. The view, which the commentator attributes to Śākaṭāyana, is simply assumed to be the default view. The citation of the RPR in Bhārgava- Bhāskara’s commentary shows that Śaunaka’s view was also shared by Gārgya. This rule provides a fitting answer to Surya Kanta’s excessive claims about the Śaunakīya-ness of this text. It is indeed called Śaunakīyā Caturā- dhyāyīikā and no doubt belongs to the tradition of Śaunaka. At the same time, one must keep in mind that this tradition was not immutable, and in the course of time, it came to adopt in practice the doctrines of other sages like Śākaṭā- yana, which were historically at variance with the views of Śaunaka. Also see CA 4.1.52, and the CAB on that rule. १.१.११. अधिस्पर्शं च । Whitney (1.9). Hb: अधिस्पर्शं चतुर्थाः सोष्माणः. G: 1.1.11. Translation: [It is] also [the precept of Śaunaka] that [the pada-final thirds, i.e. voiced unaspirated stops] have a weak articulatory contact. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अधिस्पर्शं च प्रतिज्ञानं भवति । न तु वृत्तिः । किमधिस्पर्शं नाम । वक्ष्यति । यकारवकारयोः ‘लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य’ (च.आ. २.१.२४)। ‘क अा॑स॒ञ्जन्याः॒ के व॒राः’ (अ.वे. ११.८.१)। ‘उ॒ष्णेन॑ वाय उद॒केनेहि॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अ॒स्या इ॒च्छन्न॒ग्रुवै॒ पति॑म्’

108अध्याय १, पाद १ (अ.वे. ६.६०.१)। ‘स उ॑ ए॒व म॑हाय॒मः’ (अ.वे. १३.४. ५)। ‘ता इ॒मा आपः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१५.७)। Note: Whitney (1862: 15), following Weber’s suggestion, correctly removes the following passage from H: जादीन् मावसितान्स्पर्शान्पद्यानननुनासिकान् । तृतीयान् शौनकमतात्. This intervenes between अधिस्पर्शं च प्रतिज्ञा … नं भवति. While H has this spurious passage, N does not have it. Also see the note on the previous rule. भा.भा.वृत्ति - वर्गाणां ये प्रथमास्तृतीयाश्च ते वर्णा अधि- स्पर्शसंज्ञका ज्ञेयाः । Note: This rule is indeed somewhat unclear. Part of the reason for this lack of clarity is that the expression adhisparśam is extremely rare in the Sanskrit phonetic literature. It has been used adverbially in CA 2.1.24 (लेश- वृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य), and etymologically it can simply mean “as regards contact.” There are several possible interpretations. a) This interpretation is supported by the CAB. According to this in- terpretation, the rule simply means: “Adhisparśa is also a precept of Śaunaka, though such is not the recitational practice.” Then, for the meaning of the term अधिस्पर्शम्, we are referred to CA 2.1.24 (लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य). Accord- ing to this rule, in the opinion of Śākaṭāyana, the euphonic y and v were pro- nounced slightly (= लेशवृत्तिः) as regards contact (अधिस्पर्शम्), i.e. as weak glides. The same view is then ascribed to Śaunaka in the present rule. Such an inter- pretation seems less likely, because it would be unnatural that the text would refer a certain view to Śaunaka in one place and to Śākaṭāyana in another place. b) What seems more likely is that the expression अधिस्पर्शम् is used as an abbreviation for the longer phrase लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शम् found in CA 2.1.24. The phrase then refers to “partial or incomplete articulation.” With this generic meaning, one may assume that rule CA 1.1.11 (अधिस्पर्शम् च) is more closely connected to the doctrine as taught in CA 1.1.10. It could then be interpreted to mean: According to the precept of Śaunaka, the padas ending in the first members of the stop-series should rather end in the third members of the stop- series, and that these third members, i.e. voiced unaspirated stops, are articu- lated incompletely or partially, i.e. without their contact being released. This is my preferred interpretation.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका109 Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary proposes that both the firsts and thirds of the stop-series were called अधिस्पर्श according to Śaunaka. Presuma- bly they were all pronounced with a weak articulation according to Śaunaka, though such was not the recitational practice supported by the CA. This inclu- sion of both the categories has no textual support, though in terms of the gen- eral history of Indo-Aryan, all final stops are weak, see: R.L. Turner (1960: 11-19). According to Allen (1953: 70), this rule, taken along with the previous one, “is perhaps to be interpreted as indicating a realization as voiceless stops, but with the lax articulation characteristic of the voiced stops.” It is not clear to me whether the term अधिस्पर्शम् indicates ‘lax articulation characteristic of the voiced stops.’ I think that this term is more like an equivalent of लघुप्रयत्नतर “having a lighter articulatory effort” or लेशवृत्तिः “a reduced articulation.” It is most probably the non-release of the closure making it a weak articulation, rather than a lax articulation. There is a clearer reason for not accepting Allen’s interpretation. The rule is not trying to make a generic distinction between voiceless and voiced stops, but a distinction between final voiced stops versus non-final voiced stops. Since all voiced stops have the feature of laxness, one cannot use this feature to distinguish between final and non-final voiced stops. On the other hand, it is clear that while one cannot have unreleased non-final voiced stops, it is possible to have unreleased final voiced stops. Allen also does not recognize the fact that the rules refer to actual recitational or articula- tory differences, and not mere theoretical differences. He (1953: 70) renders them as: “Words ending (sc. according to orthodox doctrine) in voiceless stops, end according to Śaunaka in voiced stops, but they are not so treated (sc. phonologically); they have lax contact.” As we have noted above, this is not a phonological distinction, but a distinction in recitational practice, and the term vr̥tti refers to articulation in recitation. Whitney (1862: 15) did think of another possibility: “Or is adhisparśa to be interpreted as the name of a slighted or imperfect utterance, and did Śaunaka teach such an utterance as belonging to a final mute, which wavered, as it were, between sonant and surd? This appears somewhat more plausible, but not sufficiently so to be accepted as at all satisfactory: there is no question of a difference of contact of the organs (sparśa) in such a case.” I do not believe that the CA refers to such a wavering pronunciation. It rather refers to two different practices consistently followed by different schools of reciters. However, I agree with Whitney that the term अधिस्पर्शम् is used to refer to incomplete articulation. Whitney (1862: 16) also refers to Weber’s conjecture that the passage means that “when the padyas enter into sandhi, they are to be

110अध्याय १, पाद १ converted into tr̥tīyas before nasals (e.g. tad me, not tan me): but this is only pratijñānam, not vr̥tti.” Whitney rejects this interpretation. However, the last part of Weber’s interpretation, “but this is only pratijñānam, not vr̥tti,” is sup- ported by the commentary CAB. That means that, like the precept of Śaunaka taught in the previous rule, this rule also teaches a precept of Śaunaka, which is not carried out in the recitational practice. If this is true, then it cannot refer to the weakening of euphonic y and v, since that is part of the recitational practice (cf. CA 2.1.24: लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य). I take the rule to refer to the weakening or non-release of the final voiced unaspirated stops. Śaunaka evidently supported the weak pronunciation of the final voiced unaspirated stops, while the recitational practice maintained the voiceless unaspirated stops at the end of words. The weakening of final stops in general can draw support from what happens in the Prakrit languages, see R.L. Turner (1960: 11-19). All final stops are lost in Prakrit, except the nasals are retained in some form or another for a much longer time. It is likely that the recitational practice, perceiving the danger of losing the weak consonants, went in the other direction and strengthened them. Devoicing may have been seen as a move in the direction of preservation. The medial voiceless stops were voiced in most Prakrits, and then were lost in some, as in Mahārāṣṭrī. However, the voiced medial stops were devoiced in the northwestern Paiśācī where they were preserved and protected from loss. For HinÜber (1981: 127) this Paiśācī feature is purely orthographical “without any bearing on Paiśācī phonetics.” I am yet to be convinced by this argument. १.१.१२. द्वितीयचतुर्थाः सोष्माणः । Whitney (1.10). A, B, D, I (orig), J, L, M (corr), O: सोष्मणः. Translation: The seconds and the fourths [in the five stop- series] are termed soṣman “aspirated [stops, lit. combined with a spirant].” Note: The term soṣman literally means “with ūṣman.” Most of the later commentators on phonetic treatises interpret the term to mean “with aspiration,” and take the term ūṣman to refer to aspiration, cf. अन्वर्थसंज्ञेयम् । ऊष्मा वायुस्तेन सह वर्तन्त इति सोष्माणः, Uvaṭa on RPR 1.13. On the other hand, a more historically apt interpretation is suggested by the ancient Śikṣā text quoted in the CAB. According to this view, the aspirated stops are born through a combination of the unaspirated stop with a voiced or voiceless spirant. Thus, at an earlier period, the term soṣman probably meant “combined with a

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका111 spirant,” rather than “combined with aspiration.” Compare RPR (13.16-17): सोष्मतां च सोष्मणामूष्मणाहुः सस्थानेन ॥ (एके) घोषिणां घोषिणैव ॥ The simple fact is that these are different views. However, I believe that the view of soṣman as “combined with a spirant” must be the earlier view, since the term ūṣman as it is attested in its oldest occurrence in the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka (2.2.4, 3.2.1) and the Chāndogya-Upaniṣad (2.22.2) already seems to refer not to aspiration as such, but to spirants. Thus, historically, it is more likely that the term soṣman first meant “combined with a spirant,” and then, in certain schools, came to mean “with aspiration.” The interpretation “with aspiration” fails to account for the difference between the groups denoted by the terms ūṣman and soṣman, and points more closely in the direction of the later term mahāprāṇa, which does not distinguish between these two sub-groups. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्वितीयाश्चतुर्थाश्च वर्गाणां सोष्माणो भवन्ति । खछठथफाः । घझढधभाः । ‘सस्थानैरूष्मभिः पृक्तास्तृतीया[ः] प्रथमाश्च ये । चतुर्थाश्च द्वितीयाश्च संपद्यन्त इति स्थिति[ः] ॥’ अपर आह । चतुर्थो हकारेणेति । ‘पञ्चैव प्रथमान् स्पर्शानाहुरेके मनीषिणः । तेषां गुणोपसञ्चयादान्यभाव्यं प्रवर्तते ॥ जिह्वामूलीयशषसा उपध्मानीयपञ्चमाः । एतैर्गुणैः समन्विता द्वितीया इति तान्विदुः ॥ त एव सह घोषेण तृतीया इति तान्विदुः । ऊष्मणा च द्वितीयेन चतुर्था इति तान्विदुः ॥ प्रथमाः सह घोषेण यदा स्युरनुनासिकाः । तानाहुः पञ्चमान् स्पर्शांस्तथा वर्णगुणाः स्मृताः ॥ न तु द्विव्यञ्जनसन्धि- रसंयोगो भव(H, N: वे)त्युत (Whitney: भवेत्पुनः)। संयोगश्च प्रसज्येत क्रमो वाच्यः पुनर्भवेत् ॥ द्वित्वप्राप्तिश्चतुर्थेषु हकारो ह्यत्र कारणम् । द्वितीयेषु तु तन्नास्ति सस्थाने तन्निवारणात् ॥

112अध्याय १, पाद १ पिप्पल्यादिषु यद् द्वित्वं स्वराच्छब्दविधिः कृतः । ज्ञापकश्च (H, N: कंश्च) द्वितीयानां द्वि(H, N: हि, Whitney: द्वि)त्वप्राप्तेरिति स्थितिः ॥ गुणमात्रा तु(H, N: नु) तत्रैषामपूर्णं व्यञ्जनं क्वचित्। अपूर्णे व्यञ्जने क्रमः संयोगश्च कुतो भवेत् ॥ पृथक्सत्त्वानि पश्यामस्तुल्यलिङ्गानि कानिचित् । न तेषां लिङ्गसामान्यादेकत्वं प्रतिजायते ॥ सत्त्वपृथक्त्वाद् वै(W: द्वै)लिङ्ग्यं यदेतेषु निबोध तत् । तथैव पञ्चवर्गेण गुणमात्रेण तुल्यता ॥’ (Source?) Note: The pippalyādi gaṇa and the doubling of consonants in the words listed in this gaṇa are dealt with in CA (3.2.5: पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात्). For further information on this gaṇa, see the Note on CA (3.2.5). भा.भा.वृत्ति - वर्गाणां ये द्वितीयाश्चतुर्थाश्च ते सोष्मसंज्ञका ज्ञेयाः । हकार ऊष्मा । तेन सहिताः सोष्माणः । औरस्य- हकारेण युक्ताः प्रथमाः द्वितीया भवन्ति । तृतीया औरस्य- हकारयुक्ताश्चतुर्था भवन्ति । इमे अधिस्पर्शाः प्रथमे कचट- तप, तृतीयाः गजडदब ।१०। एते सोष्माणः । द्वितीयाः खछठथफ, चतुर्थाः घझढधभ ।१०। एषु सोष्मसु परेषु पूर्वस्य स्वरस्य संयोगनिमित्तं गुरुत्वं नैव स्यात् । औरस्य- हकारस्य लघुप्रयत्नतरत्वात् । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara offers a more simplistic view. All aspirated stops are produced by a combination of a non-aspirated stop with pulmonary h (= aurasya-hakāra). Bhārgava-Bhāskara further adds an important clarification. Even though the proposed explanation regards aspirated stops as combinations of unaspirated stops with h, the commentator hastens to add that the combina- tion is not regarded as a consonant-cluster, because the h sound which is added is a sound with a weaker effort (laghu-prayatna-tara). Thus, a short vowel pre- ceding such an aspirated stop does not become a heavy (guru) syllable. A

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका113 better explanation, of course, is that the aspiration, or the h- sound, is not an added sound, but is part of the basic phonation (anupradāna), cf. Taittirīya- Prātiśākhya (2.6: मध्ये हकारः). However, Bhārgava-Bhāskara does not worry about explaining the difference between voiced and voiceless aspirated stops. The interpretation found in the CAB offers an explanation of this difference. १.१.१३. उत्तमा अनुनासिकाः । Whitney (1.11). G: 1.1.13. Translation: The final [members of the five stop series] are termed nasal. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उत्तमाः स्पर्शवर्गाणामनुनासिका भव- न्ति। ङञणनमाः । भा.भा.वृत्ति - पञ्चानां वर्गाणां मध्ये ये उत्तमाः अन्त्याः पञ्चमा वर्णास्तेऽनुनासिकसंज्ञका ज्ञेयाः । ङञणनम । Note: Compare the usage of the terms prathama and uttama in Pāṇini, outside of the context of phonetic lists, referring to the third and the first person forms in the verbal paradigms, cf. Pāṇini 1.4.101 (तिङस्त्रीणि त्रीणि प्रथममध्यमो- त्तमाः). The term prathama refers to the group which appears first in the list, while the term uttama refers to the group which appears at the end of the list. Thus, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s paraphrase of the term uttama by antya offers the clearest interpretation. One should also note that while the term anunāsika is used here to refer to the final members of the stop-series, i.e. ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m, it is used elsewhere more generically to include the nasal vowels, cf. CA 1.3.6 and CA 1.3.8. Generally, the term anunāsika refers to those sounds which involve both the oral and nasal passages in their articulation, cf. CA 1.1.27 (अनुनासिकानां मुखनासिकम्) and P.1.1.9 (मुखनासिकावचनोऽनुनासिकः), and this often leaves sounds like the anusvāra and nāsikya uncovered by this term. १.१.१४. श्वासोऽघोषेष्वनुप्रदानः । Whitney (1.12). G: 1.1.14.

114अध्याय १, पाद १ Translation: In the case of voiceless [consonants], the [type of] phonation [or emission] is śvāsa ‘[voiceless, non-resonant] breath.’ Note: The term anupradāna raises a number of conceptual and historical problems. While Whitney generally renders this term by ‘emitted material,’ he also mentions the view of the RPR (xiii. 2) that śvāsa and nāda are prakr̥ti ‘material cause,’ or the original phonic material out of which the different sounds are fashioned. Whitney offers another translation of the term anupradāna as ‘a giving along forth, a continuous emission.’ In my view, in the period which predated the formation of the available phonetic treatises, the anupradāna view originally contrasted with the prakr̥ti view, and these two terms referring to the same phenomenon, in all likelihood, originally represented two somewhat different perspectives on the phonic material covered by the terms śvāsa and nāda. Instead of the meaning ‘along with,’ the term more directly stands for ‘that which is subsequently contributed.’ Such a notion does not make sense in terms of our modern notions of the process of articulation. However, in ancient India, there did exist a school of phonetics which argued that anupradāna is like the resounding vibrations of the sound of a bell. The clearest exposition of this view is found in the Āpiśaliśikṣā: “However, others say: When nāda ‘resonant air-stream’ is subsequently contributed to the sound produced by the contact of the point of articulation and the articulator, then through the mixture of nāda and that sound, ghoṣa ‘voice’ is produced. When śvāsa ‘non-resonant air-stream’ is subse- quently contributed [to the sound produced by the contact of the point of articulation and the articulator], then through the mixture of śvāsa and that sound, the aghoṣa ‘voiceless sound’ is produced,” अन्ये तु ब्रुवते । तत्र यदा स्थानकरणाभिघातजे ध्वनौ नादोऽनुप्रदीयते, तदा नादध्वनिसंसर्गाद्घोषो जायते, यदा तु श्वासोऽ- नुप्रदीयते, तदा श्वासध्वनिसंसर्गादघोषो जायते, Āpiśaliśikṣā, cited by K.C. Chatterji (1964: 240). This view cited by the Āpiśaliśikṣā as the view of some other scholars (अपरे तु ब्रुवते) goes hand in hand with the etymological meaning of the term anupradāna, and may have had a different significance as compared to the prakr̥ti view represented by the RPR, TPR etc. Supporting evidence for such an interpretation of the original meaning of the term anupradāna may be extracted from some ancient practices of silent or rather airless recitation (upāṃśu). In the Brāḥmaṇa literature, a priest is often advised to perform the recitation of a certain Mantra in an upāṃśu fashion. For example, the Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa (1.27, Anandashrama edn., Pt. I, p. 115) says: तस्मादुपांशु वाचा चरितव्यम्, ‘one should, therefore, act with one’s

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका115 speech in an upāṃśu fashion.’ Sāyaṇa explains this as: यथा परैर्ध्वनिर्न श्रूयते तथा ‘in such a way that others will not hear the sound.’ This does not mean that one should recite the Mantra simply in one’s mind. In the specific upāṃśu mode, one does all the movements of the articulatory organs, except that there is no sound coming out, i.e. there is no phonation. Böhtlingk and Roth in their PW on this term cite passages which clearly distinguish between an upāṃśu recitation from a mānasa ‘mental’ recitation. A more technical explanation of the term upāṃśu is found in the definition: करणवदशब्दममनःप्रयोगमुपांशु (TPR 23.6): “Upāṃśu is without sound, without application of mind, but with articulating action.” The commentary Tribhāṣyaratna paraphrases the word karaṇavat by prayatnavat, and says that this is given specifically to distinguish this form of recitation from silence: करणवदिति तूष्णींभावनिवृत्त्यर्थम्. This conception is very important, because it divides the articulatory process into two parts, phonation and the movements of the articulatory organs. Since the upāṃśu mode of recitation clearly assumes the presence of the movements of the articulatory organs without the presence of phonation, one can extrapolate that the addition of phonation leads to a recitation which then becomes audible. Most likely, it is this type of recitational practice which led to the perception of phonation as a secondary or an add-on feature. This closely corresponds to one of the two descriptions of anupradāna given by the Āpiśaliśikṣā, as something that is added on to the sound produced by the contact of an articulator and a point of articulation Such an older meaning for the term anupradāna is made likely by the use of the verb anu+pra+dā in the Vedic literature. For instance, the TS (2.2.1.4-5) reads: पषा वा इ॑न्द्रि॒यस्य॑ वी॒र्य॑स्यानुप्रदा॒ता पू॒षण॑मे॒व स्वेन॑ भाग॒धेये॒नोप॑ धावति॒ स ए॒वास्मा॒॑ इन्द्रियं॒ वीर्य॑मनु॒ प्र य॑च्छति, “Pūṣan is the giver of power and strength, verily he (= sacrificer) has recourse to Pūṣan with his own share; verily he (= Pūṣan) gives to him power and strength.” The previous passage speaks: “Verily Indra and Agni he has recourse to with their own share; verily they two place power and strength in him; with power and strength he approaches the battle and conquers in it (TS 2.2.1.3).” Thus, the verb anu-pra-dā is used in the sense of contributing something to someone who does not already have it. Also see MS (2.1.1). The word rasānupradāna also occurs twice in Yāska’s Nirukta (7.10, 10.34). In the first occurrence (NR 7.10), Sarup translates it by ‘release’ of waters [by Indra by means of slaying of the demon Vr̥tra], and in the second occurrence, as ‘gift of juice.’ This also goes along with my suggestion (cf. Introduction, 3.2.2) that in the formative stages of Sanskrit phonetics, the distinction between the points of articulation of sounds was probably understood earlier than the distinction

116अध्याय १, पाद १ between voiced/voiceless consonants, and aspirated/unaspirated consonants. This is what may have allowed some early traditions to view, for example, k as the representative consonant, which subsequently came to be differentiated between k, kh, g, gh etc. through various combinations of primitive sounds. A similar view is found in the Śikṣā verses cited on CA (1.1.12). Also see RPR (13.5-6), and Deshpande (1976). Thus, the notion of voicing, aspiration, and nasality as added features to a basic non-nasal voiceless unaspirated consonant is a fairly old conception, and it occurs independently of the concerns of the definition of homogeneity (sāvarṇya) in these texts. Also compare the term anunāsika to anupradāna; both share the prefix anu, and probably both hint at the ‘add-on’ character of these features as conceived by some of these old traditions. However, it looks as if the term anupradāna soon lost its original ety- mological meaning and was shared by most of the schools, including the ones which espoused the prakr̥ti view. This is also clear from the Āpiśaliśikṣā itself, where the other school does not subscribe to the ‘subsequent’ character of nāda and ghoṣa, and yet calls them anupradāna. In these traditions, the term anu- pradāna has been understood differently. George Cardona (personal commu- nication) suggests that in traditions such as the TPR (2.4-10: संवृते कण्ठे नादः क्रियते। विवृते श्वासः । मध्ये हकारः । ता वर्णप्रकृतयः । नादोऽनुप्रदानः स्वरघोषवत्सु। हकारो हचतुर्थेषु। अघोषेषु श्वासः) the word “anupradāna could be derived with lyuṭ denoting either an instrument or an object: that by which the sounds are produced or that which is emitted in producing the sounds.” This is in accor- dance with the interpretation of the term anupradāna as given by the commen- tary Tribhāṣyaratna on TPR (2.8): अनुप्रदीयतेऽनेन वर्ण इत्यनुप्रदानं मूलकारणम् । अनुप्रदीयते उपादीयते जन्यत इत्यर्थः । However, one may note that the most likely earlier etymological mean- ing of the term anupradāna as an ‘added or subsequently contributed factor’ is eventually picked up by the later texts when they use the term bāhyaprayatna ‘external effort’ to refer to these types of phonation. While most scholars have translated the term anupradāna by ‘phonic material,’ Allen (1953: 23) renders it by ‘secondary feature,’ thus capturing the etymological significance of the term. Following the lead of Patañjali and the Āpiśaliśikṣā, he lists anupradāna under ‘extra-buccal processes’ (bāhyaprayatna). While this accurately repre- sents the view of Patañjali and the Āpiśaliśikṣā, we must keep in mind that such a global division of internal versus external efforts is not common to the Prātiśākhyas. And yet, as has been hinted above, the term anupradāna in its etymological meaning may have implied the secondary or external nature of this feature.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका117 A somewhat different explanation is suggested by Cardona (personal communication): “Given that the Taittirīya- and R̥kprātiśākhyas very deliber- ately and carefully distinguish between descriptions of speech production and statement of phonological entities, I think it wise to accept that anupradāna was used as equivalent to prakr̥ti with reference to śvāsa, nāda and their combina- tion (hakāra in TPR terms). The other view, which takes anupradāna as refer- ring to features added to basic sounds is obviously based on the primacy of ābhyantaraprayatna with respect to savarṇa sets. … The RPR/TPR descriptions do indeed describe the articulatory process. The alternative way, wherein one has a basic sound defined by sthāna and prayatna to which anupradānas are added, is patently a blend of phonetics and phonological considerations.” For a detailed argument in this direction, see: Cardona (1986). We may also point out that some texts use the term anupradāna as an adjective for the terms śvāsa and nāda, and hence in these texts the word appears in the masculine gender. However, other texts, such as the Āpiśali- śikṣā (8.11, Yudhishthir Mīmāṃsaka edition: तौ श्वासनादावनुप्रदानमित्याचक्षते), use the term in the neuter gender, indicating that it is used as a substantive. In any case, there is no doubt about the reference of the term. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - श्वासः अघोषेषु वर्णेषु अनुप्रदानो भवति । कचटतपाः । खछठथफाः । शषसाः । ‘शषसाश्च यमौ द्वौ च द्वितीयाः प्रथमाश्च ये । अघोषा, व्यञ्जनं शेषं घोषवद् दृश्यते बुधैः ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, १७) Note: The commentary on this rule is found only in the manuscript N, and hence was not available to Whitney who worked with only the manuscript H. भा.भा.वृत्ति - अघोषसंज्ञकेषु वर्णेषु श्वासः अनुप्रदानः बाह्यः प्रयत्नो ज्ञेयः । वर्गाणां प्रथमद्वितीयाः कखचछटठत- थपफ ।१०। तेषां यमाः ।१०। विसर्गः । जिह्वामूलीयः । उपध्मानीयः । शषस ।६। एते षड्विंशतिः अघोषाः श्वासानु- प्रदाना ज्ञेयाः ।

118अध्याय १, पाद १ Note: The categorization of the various types of anupradāna as types of bāhyaprayatna is not relevant to the Prātiśākhya tradition, but is a reflection of the influence of the Pāṇinian school. The commentator brings in categories from the Pāṇinian school to explain the usage of the Prātiśākhya. To some extent, this is indicative of the fact that the Prātiśākhya traditions, in the course of time, became secondary traditions, and had to be explained in terms of the main-stream paradigm of Pāṇinian grammar. The distinction between bāhya- prayatna and ābhyantaraprayatna is relevant to the definition of homogeneity within the Pāṇinian school, but has little relevance to the Prātiśākhya tradition, Cf. Deshpande (1975: 11). There is also an important assertion made in the verse cited by the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya and in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary that the yamas or the nasalized twins or transitional nasal allophones of voiceless sounds like k and kh are also voiceless. Interestingly, the CAB itself does not list these voiceless yamas. On the other hand, the CAB on the next rule explicitly lists the voiced yamas: g̐ and g̐h. One does not quite know whether the notion of voiceless yamas was felt to be somewhat uncomfortable. While other Prāti- śākhyas do list yamas for k, kh etc., there is no explicit indication that these are voiceless. While Whitney (1862: 18) does refer to the sonant nasalized twins for g and gh, he does not mention the fact that the nasalized twins for k, kh etc. are listed by the verse cited in the CA as voiceless consonants. In fact, for some reason, Whitney does not refer to the verse cited in that commentary at all, even though it does occur in the ms. of the CAB which was available to him. १.१.१५. नादो घोषवत्स्वरेषु । Whitney (1.13). B (orig), D, F, Hab, O(corr): °वत्सरेषु. G, I, O(orig): °वत्परेषु. A, B: °षो is corrected to घो. G: 1.1.15. Translation: In the case of voiced [consonants] and vowels, the [type of] phonation [or emission] is nāda ‘resonance.’ Note: For a critique of Max MÜller’s and Whitney’s refusal to accept the voiced h, and the combination of voice and aspiration in sounds like gh, jh, ḍh, dh, and bh, and the subsequent rebuttal of this early misunderstanding, see: Allen (1953: 35ff). The notion of ‘breathy voice’ is now commonplace in modern phonetics, see: Peter Ladefoged (1971: 12-13; 1973).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका119 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नादः घोषवत्सु च वर्णेषु स्वरेषु चानु- प्रदानो भवति । गजडदबाः । घझढधभाः । ङञणनमाः । यरलवाः । हः । गंघं । अआआ३ इईई३ उऊऊ३ ऋॠ- ॠ३ ऌलॄलॄ३ एए[३] ऐऐ३ ओओ[३] औ(H, N: ओ३) [औ३ not listed in H, N]। ‘व्यञ्जनं घोषवत्संज्ञमन्तस्था हः परौ यमौ । त्रयस्त्रयश्च वर्गान्त्या अघोषः शेष उच्यते ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, १६) Note: The commentary interestingly lists the long vocalic l̥̄ which does not occur in Sanskrit and is not accepted by most traditions. It is equally un- clear whether it is the commentator or the copyist who is responsible for this inclusion. भा.भा.वृत्ति - (नादोऽघोषवत्परेषु) अघोषेषु यथा श्वासः तद्वदघोषेभ्यः परेषु घोषेषु नादोऽनुप्रदानो ज्ञेयः । घोषाः । वर्गाणां तृतीयचतुर्थपञ्चमाः । गघङजझञडढणदधनबभमय- रलवह ।२०। तृतीयचतुर्थानां यमाः ।१०। एवं त्रिंशत् घोषाः नादानुप्रदाना ज्ञेयाः । स्वराणां प्रयत्नानाह - Note: The statement of this rule as well as similar rules in other Prātiśākhyas raise the legitimate question of whether the terms nāda and ghoṣa are co-extensive with each other. Literally interpreted, the rule would seem to suggest that, while vowels and the ghoṣavat consonants share the feature of nāda, the separate mention of ghoṣavat consonants, apart from vowels, seems to suggest at least a possibility that vowels may not have the feature of ghoṣa. The question boils down to this. Is there a phonetic distinction intended between the notions of nāda and ghoṣa, or is this distinction in some sense phonological and not phonetic? This has led to a lively debate among scholars, cf. Deshpande, (1976); Cardona, (1983, 1986), and Stautzebach (1994: 287). The commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara has been clearly misled by a wrong reading for the rule, i.e. नादोऽघोषवत्परेषु. Such a reading presumes the existence of the term aghoṣavat. While the term ghoṣavat is a common term, its opposite is always aghoṣa, and not aghoṣavat. It also comes up with an

120अध्याय १, पाद १ interpretation which excludes vowels from having the feature of nāda. Such a view is not at all acceptable, and it simply shows a deteriorating state of phonetic scholarship reflected in this late commentary. Such a view originates in a certain misunderstanding due to the fact that the emission-features are relegated to the category of bāhyaprayatna ‘external effort,’ and the external effort features are useful in the Pāṇinian phonology only in the context of selecting a substitute with maximal featural proximity (āntaratamya). Since, in practical terms, such a consideration of substitutes, in terms of external efforts, applies only to the substitutes for consonants, one develops a misperception that vowels do not have the emission features. This misguided view has been articulated by several late texts, cf. the following statement from Pandit Jagadīśācārya Citrācārya (1969: 13): तत्रोदात्तानुदात्तस्वरितास्त्रयः स्वराणामेव सर्वेषाम् । शेषा अष्टौ विवारादयो व्यञ्जनानामेव. १.१.१६. समानयमेऽक्षरमुच्चैरुदात्तं नीचैरनुदात्तमाक्षिप्तं स्वरितम् । Whitney (1.14-16). All the manuscripts treat this as a single Sūtra. A, B, D, L: समानमक्षरमुच्चै°. G: 1.1.16. Translation: In one and the same register, a syllable with high [tone, pitch] is termed udātta, one with a low (lit. non- high) [tone, pitch] is termed anudātta, and one with a falling (lit. cast down, thrust down from high to low) [tone, pitch] is termed svarita. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समानयमे(H, N: म)ऽक्षरमुच्चैर्यत्तदु- दात्तं भवति । नीचैर्यत्तदनुदात्तं भवति । आक्षिप्तं यत्तत्स्वरितं भवति । ‘प्र॒जां (H: प्रा मू, Whitney: प्रजां) च॒ रोह॒’ (अ.वे. १३.१.३४)। ‘अ॒मा॒वा॒स्या॑’ (अ.वे. ७.७९.२)। ‘क॒न्या॑’ (अ.वे. १.१४.२)। [only N:] ‘धा॒न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.२४.२)। ‘आ॒चा॒र्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ११.५.३)। ‘रा॒ज॒न्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१७. ९)। ‘न्य॑क्’ (अ.वे. ६.९१.२)। ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.९.४)। ‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। Note: Whitney, I think, properly amends the mss. reading प्रामू च रोह to प्रजां च रोह which is attested in the known text of the AV. Surya Kanta

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका121 (APR, Introduction, p. 40), on the other hand, believes that the ms. reading is probably the genuine Śaunakīya reading, and that it is not found in the currently known Vulgate of the AV, because it is not the genuinely Śaunakīya recension. Allen (1953: 89) particularly commends the CA for making an impor- tant specification in this rule: “the AP, in describing the udātta as high and the anudātta as low, made the important specification, ‘within the same register’ (= samānayame); the pitches, that is to say, are relative and not absolute - a point which is specifically made by Patañjali: The terms ‘high’ and ‘low’ have no absolute signification.” For a detailed discussion of the term ākṣipta, see: Allen (1953: 87-88). It is not simply the falling tone, but it carries the meaning of thrusting down. भा.भा.वृत्ति - समानाश्च यमाश्च समानयमं तस्मिन् समान- यमे यदक्षरं तदुदात्तादिसंज्ञं स्यात् । समानाः अआइईउऊ- ऋॠऌ । यमाः । सन्ध्यक्षराणि एऐओऔ । इति स्वराः । स्वरसंज्ञकमक्षरं तु उच्चैरुदात्तम् । ह्रस्वाः पञ्च दीर्घा अष्टौ प्लुता नव । ऌकारस्य दीर्घत्वाभावात् । सन्ध्यक्षराणां ह्रस्व- त्वाभावाच्च । सर्वे द्वाविंशतिः । भूर्भुव[ः] स्वरिति लोक- त्रयनिर्देशार्थं यथा शिरः क्रियते तद्वदत्रापि । भूमिनिर्देशार्थ- मधः शिरः क्रियते । तद्वदनुदात्तोच्चारः । ‘दे॒वस्य॑’ (अ.वे. २.३६.२)। अत्र देकारोऽनुदात्तः । भुवर्दर्शनाय किञ्चिदूर्ध्वं शिरः क्रियते तद्वदुच्चारो यस्य स उदात्तः । ‘दे॒वस्य॑’ । अत्र वकार उदात्तः । स्वर्दर्शनायात्यूर्ध्वं शिरः क्रियते तद्वदुच्चारो यस्य सः स्वरितः । ‘दे॒वस्य॑’ । अत्र स्यकारः स्वरितः । अत एवोक्तम् ‘उच्चैरुदात्तम्’ [।] वक्ष्यमाणेषु कण्ठादिस्थानेषूच्चा- र्यमाणो ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतस्वरः उच्चैरूर्ध्वभागे उत्पन्नः उदात्त- संज्ञः ऊर्ध्वमात्तः उदात्तः । ‘नीचैरनुदात्तम्’ । तथाविध- स्थानेष्वधोभागेषूच्चार्यमाणः स्वरः अनुदात्तसंज्ञः उदात्तविरुद्धः अनुदात्तः । ‘आक्षिप्तं स्वरितम्’ । आ उभयार्थकः उभय- धर्मावभिव्याप्य क्षिप्तमुच्चारितमक्षरं स्वरितं स्यात् । पूर्वार्धे

122अध्याय १, पाद १ उदात्तमुत्तरार्धेऽनुदात्तमित्यर्थः । उदात्ताः । ‘प्र’ (अ.वे. ४. ३३.३)। ‘सम्’ (अ.वे. १.१५.१)। ‘उद्’ (अ.वे. २.९.२)। ‘वि’ (अ.वे. १.१.३)। ‘नि’ (अ.वे. १.१.२)। अनुदात्ताः । ‘नः॒’ (अ.वे. १.२.२)। ‘वः॒’ (अ.वे. १.५.२)। ‘ते॒’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘मे॒’ (अ.वे. १.१.१)। ‘वा॒म्’ (अ.वे. २.२९.४)। ‘नाै॒’ (अ.वे. ५.११.१०)। ‘त्वा॒’ (अ.वे. १.१०.३)। ‘मा॒’ (अ.वे. १.३३.४)। ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.२.४)। ‘वा॒’ (अ.वे. १. ४.२)। ‘ह॒’ (अ.वे. २.२७.३)। ‘ई॒म्’ (अ.वे. ४.३०.४)। ‘उ॒’ (अ.वे. १.६.४)। ‘स्म॒’ (अ.वे. १.८.२)। स्वरिताः । ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.१४.४)। ‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। ‘न्य॑क्’ (अ.वे. ६.९१.२)। स्वरितभेदास्तल्लक्षणानि च तृतीयाध्याये वक्ष्यन्ते । भेदनामान्याह मण्डूकः स्वशिक्षायाम् (Śikṣā- saṃgraha, Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, verse 72)- ‘अभिनिहितः प्राश्लि[G: क्श्लि]ष्टो जात्यः क्षैप्रश्च पादवृत्तश्च ॥ तैरोव्यञ्जनः षष्ठस्तिरोविरामश्च सप्तम इति ॥’ भाव्यश्चेत्यष्टमः । अभिनिहितः । ‘सो॑ऽध्व॒रान्’ (अ.वे. १९. ५९.३)। ‘ये॒स्याम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२६.१)। प्राश्लि[G: क्श्लि]- ष्टः । ‘अभीद्धे’ (?, ‘अ॒भी॑न्द्धे,’ अ.वे. ११.३.१८; ‘अ॒भी॑- द्धः,’ अ.वे. ७.७३.७, VVRI edn.: ७.७७.७;)। ‘अ॒भी॑मे’ (अ.वे. ६.१२६.३)। जात्यः । ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.१४.४)। ‘क॒न्ये॑व’ (अ.वे. ६.२२.३)। ‘ध॒न्व॒न्याः॒ शमु॑’ (अ.वे. १. ६.४) । क्षैप्रः । ‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। ‘व्यो॑म’ (अ.वे. ११.१.३०)। ‘त॒न्वे॒’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘न्यग्वातः॑’ (अ. वे. ६.९१.२)। पादवृत्तः । ‘क ईं

॑ वेद’ (अ.वे. २०.५३.१; २०.५७.११)। ‘य ईं

॑ च॒कार॑’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.१०, VVRI edn.: ९.१५.१०)। तैरोव्यञ्जनः । ‘इन्द्रः॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.३)। ‘अ॒ग्निना॑’ (अ.वे. ३.१२.९)। तिरोविरामः । ‘प्र॒जाऽप॑तिः’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका123 (अ.वे. २.३४.४)। ‘पु॒रःऽहि॑तम्’ (अ.वे. ११.१०.१८, VVRI edn.: ११.१२.१८)। भाव्यस्वरितः परिहारे । ‘तनन- पा॑दिति॒ तनू॒ऽ(G: ३)नपा॑त्’ (क्रमपरिहार, अ.वे. ५.२७. १)। मण्डूक आह (Śikṣāsaṃgraha, Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, verse 80)ः ‘द्वयोरुदात्तयोर्मध्ये नीचो यः स्यादवग्रहः ॥ तथा भाव्यो भवेत्कम्पस्तनूनपान्निदर्शनम् ॥’ इति ॥ एवं ‘शची॒ऽ(G: ३)पतिः॑’ (part of क्रमपरिहार, अ.वे. ३. १०.१२)। Note: Following the Pāṇinian school, Bhārgava-Bhāskara says that there is no long l̥̄ in the usage of Sanskrit. Interestingly, Bhārgava-Bhāskara refers to different head movements of the reciter to indicate different accents. The anudātta is indicated by the lowering of the head. The udātta is indicated by the slight raising of the head. The svarita is indicated by raising the head even higher to look upwards to the heaven (svar). Especially interesting is his folk-etymological linking of the word svarita with svar ‘heaven,’ and the upward movement of the head of the reciter. This also corresponds to the orthographic vertical mark to indicate a svarita. While the western scholars have focused upon the ‘falling’ character of svarita, the Indian tradition may have looked at the initial high tone as the distinguishing mark of a svarita. Several texts say that the initial portion of a svarita is not just a high tone (udātta), but that it is a super-high tone (udāttatara), cf. RPR (3.45) and Vaidikābharaṇa on TPR (1.41). In Vedic recitation, when an udātta is followed by a svarita, the tone rises from high to super-high, before falling. For gestures accompanying the different pitches used by different tradition, see: Allen (1953: 91). The reading of the second verse from the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā quoted in the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara is slightly different from the one seen in the Śikṣāsaṃgraha edition (p. 470): द्वयोरुदात्तयोर्मध्ये नीचोऽस्ति यदवग्रहः । ताथाभाव्यो भवेत्कम्पस्तनूनपान्निदर्शनम् ॥ १.१.१७. स्वरितस्यादितो मात्रार्धमुदात्तम् । Whitney (1.17). G: 1.1.17.

124अध्याय १, पाद १ Translation: The initial half-mora of a svarita is high-pitched (udātta), [and, by implication, the rest is low-pitched (anu- dātta)]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरितस्यादितः मात्रार्धमुदात्तं भवति। ‘अ॒मा॒वा॒स्या॑’ (अ.वे. ७.७९.२)। ‘क॒न्या॑’ (अ.वे. १.१४. २)। ‘धा॒न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.२४.२)। ‘आ॒चा॒र्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ११. ५.३)। ‘रा॒ज॒न्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.९)। ‘न्य॑क्’ (अ.वे. ६. ९१.२)। ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.९.४)। (only N:)‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। Note: The first five examples quoted by the CAB occur in the same order as the first five examples cited under APR (54, p. 43). The next three examples cited by the CAB occur in the same order under APR (53, p. 43). It should also be noted that these are the examples of the jātya type of svarita. All the same examples appear in the CAB under CA (3.3.8) which defines the jātya variety. भा.भा.वृत्ति - मात्रायाः मात्रयोः मात्राणां च अर्धं मात्रा- र्धम् । ह्रस्वस्वरितस्य मात्राया अर्धमादितोऽर्धमात्रा उदात्ता । दीर्घस्वरितस्यादौ मात्रयोरर्धमेका मात्रा तावदुदात्तम् । प्लुत- स्वरितस्यादौ मात्राणामर्धं सार्धैकमात्रा तावत्कालमुदात्तता । उर्वरितमुत्तरार्धमनुदात्तमर्थतः सिद्धम् । पाणिनीयेऽपि ‘तस्या- दित उदात्तमर्धह्रस्वम्’ (पा. १.२.३२) इति । अथ वर्णो- च्चारस्थानान्युपदिशति - Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara interprets the rule to mean that the first half, not just a half-mora, is high-pitched. The statement of Pāṇini 1.2.32 (तस्यादित उदात्तमर्धह्रस्वम्) is clearer in saying that a half-short-vowel quantity at the beginning of a svarita is udātta. It is also certain that the CA rule is identi- cal in meaning with Pāṇini 1.2.32. Therefore, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s interpreta- tion of this rule does not seem to be correct. For him, irrespective of the number of mātrās in a svarita vowel, fully the first half portion is udātta. If such were the intention, the CA rule might as well be framed with the expres-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका125 sion ardham alone, and not mātrārdham. However, we may note that Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s interpretation is in agreement with late Pāṇinian com- mentaries which disregard the word hrasva in ardhahrasvam, cf. SK on P.1.2.32 (p. 5): ह्रस्वग्रहणमतन्त्रम् । स्वरितस्यादितोऽर्धमुदात्तं बोध्यम् । उत्तरार्धं तु परि- शेषादनुदात्तम् । १.१.१८. मुखे विशेषाः करणस्य । Whitney (1.18). G:1.1.18. Translation: In the oral tract (lit. mouth), there are the [following] distinctions of the articulator [karaṇa ‘the instru- ment, the moving organ,’ in contrast with the relatively static sthānas ‘points of articulation’]. Note: The rendering of mukha by ‘oral tract’ needs some comment. It is not always clear whether or not to include nāsikā ‘nose’ as part of mukha. While CA (1.1.26: नासिक्यानां नासिका) lists nāsikā as an articulator for the pure nasal nāsikya sounds under the general heading of our present rule, CA (1.1.27: अनुनासिकानां मुखनासिकम्) mentions oral and nasal tracts separately and says that both of these are used for the articulation of nasalized sounds (anunāsika). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मुखे विशेषा भवन्ति करणस्य । कच- टतपाः । भा.भा.वृत्ति - मुखे वदनान्तराकाशप्रान्तदेशे । करणस्य स्पृष्टादिसंज्ञकप्रयत्नस्य विशेषाः । वर्णोच्चारणस्थानभेदाः कथ्यन्ते । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara seems to have confused the notion of prayatna as it appears in the Pāṇinian school with that of karaṇa in this text. The first term refers to the manner in which the articulator (karaṇa) relates to the point of articulation (sthāna). On the other hand, the second term refers to the articulator. Historically speaking, the term prayatna originally did not even have this meaning. Its meaning, most probably, was simply “effort.” This is the meaning seen even in Pāṇini’s rules like P.8.3.18 (व्योर्लघुप्रयत्नतरः शाकटा- यनस्य). Here, the term laghu-prayatna-tara does not refer to the manner in

126अध्याय १, पाद १ which the articulator relates to the point of articulation, but to the general articulatory effort. In this case, it refers to a weak articulatory effort. Most probably, the term prayatna had the same generic meaning in P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्), but that it was explained by the commentators by using more refined categories which were developed in later times. It seems that words like spr̥ṣṭa ‘touching, in contact’ were originally used as adjectives of the word karaṇa ‘articulator’ to distinguish the different positions of the articulator. This is seen in the CA and in the RPR (13.8ff: तद्विशेषः करणं स्पृष्टमस्थितं …) These differences of the position of the karaṇa later came to be denoted by the term prayatna. The VPR (1.43: समानस्थानकरणास्यप्रयत्नः सवर्णः) is probably the earliest text which came to clearly distinguish between the terms karaṇa ‘articulator’ and āsyaprayatna ‘effort,’ see: Deshpande (1975: 9-11, 94- 97). The CA clearly first describes the articulators for different sounds, and then it describes the positions of those articulators. However, it does not use the term prayatna to refer to these different positions of the articulators (karaṇa). १.१.१९. कण्ठ्यानामधरकण्ठ्यः । Whitney (1.19), G: °कण्ठः. A, B, L, M: °मधरं कंण्ठ्यः. G: 1.1.19. Except G, all mss. support the reading कण्ठ्यः. While the reading adhara- kaṇṭhyaḥ is clearly justified on the basis of the manuscript evidence, one wonders if adharakaṇṭhaḥ was the original reading. The oldest commentary CAB knows the reading adharakaṇṭhaḥ. It is possible that -kaṇṭhyaḥ was an ancient error which was copied blindly by most manuscript traditions. Translation: For the glottal sounds, the lower part of the glottal area [is the articulator]. Note: Allen (1953: 59) prefers to render kaṇṭhya with ‘glottal.’ However, it is not clear what is exactly meant by the distinction of lower glottal area versus upper glottal area. Whitney renders kaṇṭha with throat. However, the same word kaṇṭha is used to describe the production of resonance and voiceless breath, depending upon whether kaṇṭha is open or closed. Such a description better fits the glottis, rather than throat in a broad sense. Now what could adharakaṇṭh(y)a refer to, in contrast with the rest of the kaṇṭha ? If we take kaṇṭha to refer just to the glottis, then it is difficult to make the distinction of lower versus upper glottis. However, it is possible that the word kaṇṭha referred to the entire throat area inclusive of the glottis. The upper part of this kaṇṭha was involved in the production of velar sounds, while the lower part,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका127 i.e. the glottis, was involved in the production of the vowel a etc. Since, the only moving part of this kaṇṭha in the sense of the whole throat area was the glottis, the text could refer to it to be the articulator for the vowel a etc. These difficulties of accurate classification probably explain why some texts opted to describe the k-series as a kaṇṭhya series, while others chose to describe it as a velar series with a distinct point of articulation, i.e. the root of the tongue. In a view that a and k were both kaṇṭhya sounds, one could not truly say that they had the same karaṇa. Such a reasoning may have led the ancient phoneticians to differentiate these two by positing different points of articulations for them. In any case, the description of the process of articulation of these glottal sounds as given in the CAB is very dubious: “the upper kaṇṭha is the place of articulation and it is approached by the lower kaṇṭha.” This reference to lower kaṇṭha as the articulator, in spite of its understandable parallelism with the notion of the lower lip as the articulator for labials in CA (1.1.25), hardly makes sense. Perhaps, such absurdities may have led other texts to declare that glottal sounds do not have a distinct karaṇa of their own. For them, the point of articulation and the articulator are the same, cf. शेषाः स्वस्थानकरणाः, Āpiśali- śikṣā (2.9, p. 3, Yudhishthira Mimamsaka edition). Allen (1953: 59) has an enlightening discussion on the classification of a, h, and -ḥ as kaṇṭhya ‘glottal’ sounds: “To class the open vowels as ‘glottal’ appears at first sight an indefensible procedure. It becomes less so when we perceive the conceptual framework underlying these statements. It will be remembered that the TP referred to a ‘neutral’ position of the articulatory organs, in which the tongue is extended and depressed, and the lips are in the position for a. The classification of a as glottal begins to make sense if we assume that it was viewed as a ‘neutral’ vowel in the sense of involving no special intra-buccal articulatory effort.” Where the difference of opinion arises is the question of karaṇa for these ‘glottal’ sounds. The CA is perhaps making a unique effort to find a karaṇa for these sounds, for which, according to other traditions, there is no distinct karaṇa (Allen 1953: 49, 59). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - कण्ठस्थानानां वर्णानामधरकण्ठः करणं भवति । किं पुनः स्थानं किं करणम् । उत्तरकण्ठः स्थानम- धरकण्ठेन करणेनोपक्रम्यते । यदुपक्रम्यते तत्स्थानम् । येनो- पक्रम्यते तत्करणम् । अआआ३ह[विसर्जनीयः] (H, N: वृक्षः)। एऐओऔ ।

128अध्याय १, पाद १ ‘अधः [only N: स्थानानि वर्णानां कण्ठ्योऽवर्ण- हकारयोः । विसर्जनीयस्यैदौतोराद्ययोर्मात्रयोः स्मृतः ॥ शेषस्ताल्वो]ष्ठयोर्वाच्यः स यथासङ्ख्यमिष्यते । द्विस्थानत्वं तयोश्चापि वर्गान्त्यानां च शिष्यते ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, १८-१९) Note: The reading for these verses in the printed version of the Varṇapaṭala is slightly different: अतः स्थानानि वर्णानां कण्ठोऽवर्णहकारयोः । विसर्जनीय ऐ औ च स्वाद्ययोर्मात्रयोः स्मृतः ॥१८॥ शेषस्ताल्वोष्ठये(यो?)र्बोध्यः स यथासंख्यमिष्यते । द्विस्थानं यमयोश्चापि वर्गान्त्यानां च शिष्यते ॥१९|| p. 204. Allen (1953: 17) points out the similarity of the definitions of sthāna and karaṇa given by the CAB to Kenneth Pike’s terms ‘point of articulation’ and ‘articulator.’ Also compare TPR (2.31-34): स्वराणां यत्रोपसंहारस्तत्स्थानम् । यदुपसंहरति तत्करणम् । अन्येषां तु यत्र स्पर्शनं तत्स्थानम् । येन स्पर्शयति तत्करणम् । The CA does not give us a list of which sounds it considers to be kaṇṭhya. That task has fallen to the commentators. The CAB and the ancient Śikṣā text it cites agree that the label of kaṇṭhya ‘glottal’ be given to a, ā, ā3, h, and ḥ. Then comes the difference. While the cited Śikṣā verse says that the initial elements of the diphthongs ai, and au are also glottal, the CAB goes one step ahead and adds e and o, implying that these sounds are not mono- phthongs, and that their initial elements are also glottal. In doing so, it agrees with the statements found in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.1. 28). भा.भा.वृत्ति - (कण्ठ्यानामधरकण्ठः) अकारहकारविसर्गाः कण्ठ्याः। अहअः । एतेषामुच्चारस्थानमधरकण्ठः कण्ठ- बिलस्याधोभागो ज्ञातव्यः । Note: While the CAB appropriately maintains the distinction between the point of articulation (sthāna) and the articulator (karaṇa), Bhārgava- Bhāskara has confused the two notions. The rule, taken in its proper context, says that the lower kaṇṭha is the articulator of those sounds which have kaṇṭha

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका129 as their point of articulation. Bhārgava-Bhāskara interprets the rule to mean: “The point of articulation for these sounds is the lower kaṇṭha.” This is not correct. This confusion is continued in many of the following rules. On this particular rule, Bhārgava-Bhāskara does seem to maintain a certain distinction of the CA tradition from that represented by the texts such as the Āpiśaliśikṣā (1.2) and the prose Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (1.2) which treat the k- series as kaṇṭhya, in addition to a, h, and ḥ. The Āpiśaliśikṣā (1.2) and the prose Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (1.2) say: अकुहविसर्जनीयाः कण्ठ्याः, cf. SK on P.1.1.9: अकु- हविसर्जनीयानां कण्ठः. These texts express a view different from that of the metri- cal Pāṇinīyaśikṣā, which ascribes kaṇṭha as the point of articulation for a and h, while it ascribes jihvāmūla to the k-series, cf. verses 17-18: कण्ठ्यावहौ, … जिह्वामूले तु कुः प्रोक्तः. १.१.२०. जिह्वामूलीयानां हनुमूलम् । Whitney (1.20). G: 1.1.20. I: 1.20. Most mss. read jivhā for jihvā. Translation: For velar sounds (lit. tongue-root sounds), the base (lit. root) of the jaw [is the articulator]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जिह्वामूलस्थानानां वर्णानां हनुमूलं करणं भवति। ऋॠॠ३कखगघङ । पुरुषᳲखनति । ऌलॄ। ‘जिह्वामूलमृवर्णस्य कवर्गस्य च भाष्यते । यश्चैव जिह्वामूलीय ऌवर्णस्येति स स्मृतः ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, २०, *ऌवर्णश्चेति च स्मृतः) Note: Whitney’s emendation for the last quarter of the verse: ऌवर्णश्चेति ते स्मृताः । There is no support for this reading. Also for the difficult-to-read segment ऌलॄ, Whitney reads कॢप्त and refers to AV 10.10.23. Neither H, nor N supports Whitney. A comparison of the way ऌ and लॄ are written in the manuscript N in the commentary on CA 1.1.32 leaves no doubt that the se- quence here refers to these two sounds. It may also be noted that the transmis- sion of the CAB and that of the Varṇapaṭala may have occurred independently. The reading ऌवर्णस्येति स स्मृतः is not found among the variants in the Varṇapaṭala manuscripts.

130अध्याय १, पाद १ भा.भा.वृत्ति - कवर्गः कखपरो विसर्गश्च जिह्वामूलीयाः । कखगघङअᳲक अᳲख । एतेषामुच्चारणस्थानमधराया हनो- र्मूलं ज्ञेयम् । कण्ठबिलाधोभागात्किञ्चिदन्तःस्थितो देशः । हनुमूलं तदेव जिह्वामूलम् । जिह्वामूले भवाः । छः प्रत्ययः। जिह्वामूलीयाः । Note: Again, the commentators differ as to which sounds are to be listed as velar sounds. The CAB and the Śikṣā it cites list the k-series of stops, the r̥ and l̥ vowels, and the allophone of ḥ before k, kh, i.e. ḫ (jihvāmūlīya). For a detailed review of the velar classification for r̥ and l̥ vowels, see Hans Henrich Hock (1992). Following the late Pāṇinian tradition, Bhārgava- Bhāskara removes the r̥- and l̥-vowels from the list of velars. For him, the r̥- vowels are retroflex, while the l̥-vowels are dental. See Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA 1.1.22, 24. The confusion of the notions of sthāna and karaṇa continues into this rule in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary. This is explainable in part because he identifies the referents of the words jihvāmūla and hanumūla. If these two words refer to the same thing, then how can the point of articulation be differ- ent from the articulator? It needs to be pointed out that these terms do not refer to the same thing. Another point to consider is that Bhārgava-Bhāskara does not include the sounds r̥ and l̥ among the jihvāmūlīyas. For him, r̥ is a mūrdhanya sound, while l̥ is a dantya sound. This is more in line with later texts in the Pāṇinian tradition like the Siddhāntakaumudī. The CAB, on the other hand, seems to reflect an older view. The final comment of Bhārgava-Bhāskara that the word jihvāmūlīya is derived by adding the affix cha (! īya) to the word jihvāmūla shows how he takes the Pāṇinian system for granted both for himself, and for his readers. In the phonetic literature, there is indeed a good deal of confusion in the case of sounds such as these concerning which of the organs is the point of articulation and which is the articulator. While the CA rule literally seems to say that the hanumūla is the articulator and that the jihvāmūla is the point of articulation, the TPR (ii. 35: हनुमूले जिह्वामूलेन कवर्गे स्पर्शयति) presents a reverse doctrine. While the CAB seems to offer a straight forward interpretation of the CA statement, Bhārgava-Bhāskara seems to have been influenced by other tra- ditions. Thus, the Āpiśaliśikṣā (2.4: जिह्वामूलेन जिह्व्यानाम्) states that the jihvā-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका131 mūla is the articulator for jihvya sounds. The same doctrine is found in the prose Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (2.3). १.१.२१. तालव्यानां मध्यजिह्वम् । Whitney (1.21). G: 1.1.21. Most mss. read jivham. Translation: For palatal sounds, the middle of the tongue [is the articulator]. Note: Again, the CA itself does not tell us which sounds are included in the category of palatal sounds. For that we have to rely upon the commentators who differ from each other on this point. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तालुस्थानानां वर्णानां मध्यजिह्वं करणं भवति । एऐयशचछजझञ । इईई३ । ‘ताल्वे(Whitney: ल्वै)यशचवर्गाणामिवर्णस्य च भाष्यते ।’ (= वर्णपटलम्, २१) Note: The verse cited by the CAB seems to hold a slightly different view as compared to that of the commentary. The commentary, if correctly reproduced by the manuscripts, seems to include both e and ai among the sounds produced at the palate, besides the i-vowels and the c-series. On the other hand, out of e and ai, the verse seems to include only the sound e. This may be a reflection of the old view that e was a pure monophthongal tālavya sound, while ai, atrue diphthong, was a composite sound with distinct points of articulation for its two parts, kaṇṭha for the first part and tālu for the second part. The emendation suggested by Whitney does not seem to lead to an acceptable text. It is hard to see how ai could be included without the inclusion of e. On the other hand, it is easy to see how e could be included without the inclusion of ai. Bolling and Negelein (1910: 302) report that the mss. A and E of the Varṇapaṭala support the reading *tālvai-, while the rest of the mss. support the reading tālve-. Allen (1953: 52) also makes an important point: “No difficulty is provided by the description of the c-series, which at the period described by out treatises appear still to have been true palatal plosives rather than pre-palatal affricates such as are general in modern Indian pronunciation.” The modern pronunciation neither uses the middle of the tongue, nor the point of articula-

132अध्याय १, पाद १ tion named as tālu. This tālu as intended by the Sanskrit phoneticians must have been farther back on the oral dome as compared to the point touched during the pronunciation of the retroflex stops. This must be so given the back-to-front ordering of the consonantal vargas. However, the modern pro- nunciation uses a point slightly above the alveolar ridge and pressed against it not the middle of the tongue, but a portion of the tongue much closer to the tip of the tongue. The historical alternations between palatal and velar consonants are also an indication that the palatal point of articulation was much farther back and closer to the velar point, than being closer to the alveolar ridge as it is in the modern pronunciation. भा.भा.वृत्ति - इकारश्चवर्गो यकारशकारौ । तालुनि भवा- स्तालव्याः । इचछजझञयश । एतेषामष्टानां मध्यजिह्वम् । जिह्वाया मध्यस्थलं तालुस्पृष्टमुच्चारस्थानं ज्ञेयम् । जिह्वाग्र- मेकाङ्गुलं त्यक्त्वा अनन्तरं जिह्वामध्यदेशस्तेन तालव्यानामु- च्चार इति स्फुटम् । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara includes neither e nor ai among the pure tālavya sounds. This is similar to his exclusion of o and au from the list of the pure oṣṭhya sounds later on. The reason is that he treats these four sounds, in line with the late Pāṇinian tradition, to be sounds with double points of ar- ticulation, kaṇṭhatālu and kaṇṭhauṣṭha respectively for e, ai, and o, au, cf. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA1.1.28. This brings out a significant difference between the CAB and the commentary by Bhārgava-Bhāskara. The former is most certainly a relatively earlier text and is relatively free from the influence of the Pāṇinian tradition. It seems that, as time went on, the com- mentaries were influenced more and more by the Pāṇinian school. This is at- tributable to the fact that while the Pāṇinian school flourished, the Prātiśākhya tradition became more and more dormant, and the late efforts seen in the commentaries like those of Bhārgava-Bhāskara were essentially efforts to in- terprete these texts in familiar Pāṇinian terms. १.१.२२. मूर्धन्यानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रतिवेष्टितम् । Whitney (1.22). G: 1.1.22. J, K: परि for प्रति. P reads पति for प्रति. Most mss. read jivhāgram.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका133 Translation: For cerebral [or retroflex sounds], the rolled back tip of the tongue [is the articulator]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मूर्धन्यस्थानानां वर्णानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रति- वेष्टितं करणं भवति । रषटठडढण । ‘मूर्धा स्थानं षकारस्य टवर्गस्य तथा मतम् ।’ (= वर्णपटलम्, २१. *तथा मतः) Note: While the cited verse makes no reference to r or r̥, the enumera- tion in the commentary includes r, which is described elsewhere in the CA (1. 1.28) as being alveolar and not cerebral. The inclusion of r among the mūr- dhanyas is relatively late. Thus, the cited verse seems to represent an earlier phase in the development of Sanskrit phonetics. Neither the cited verse nor the commentary makes a reference to r̥, because that sound is considered to be a jihvāmūlīya by this text. On the other hand, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary below includes r̥ among the mūrdhanyas. This is again a reflection of his following the late Pāṇinian tradition. Interestingly, he excludes r from the list of mūrdhanyas. Allen (1953: 32) discusses the Indian description of retroflexion and comments that “to consider the retroflex articulations on the same terms as the velars, palatals, dentals, or labials is, even from the point of view of the Indian descriptive framework, not entirely justified.” He feels (ibid, p. 33) that “the retroflex series … is articulated as our treatises recognize, ‘by rolling back the tip of the tongue’ - that is to say, the place of articulation is not automatically determined by the application of the closure-processes to the apical articulator: there is need of a further prayatna, ‘articulatory effort,’ which might with con- sistency have been included at this point.” I feel that the curling back of the tongue has not been treated as a prayatna, firstly because the notion of prayatna is defined somewhat narrowly as referring to degrees of contact or lack of it, between the articulator and the place of articulation. Furthermore, given the same point of articulation and the articulator, one does not have a choice of whether or not to curl up one’s tongue. Thus, curling up one’s tongue is not a feature of choice, with other factors being constant. It is just sheer necessity. भा.भा.वृत्ति - मुखबिले ऊर्ध्वायाः हनोर्मध्यदेशः वर्णोच्चारे मूर्धेति संज्ञा । तत्र भवा मूर्धन्याः ऋकारटवर्गौ । ऋटठड-

134अध्याय १, पाद १ ढण एषां षण्णां प्रतिवेष्टितं जिह्वाग्रं किञ्चिद्वक्रीकृत्य मूर्ध- स्थानं स्पृष्ट्वा निमुच्यते । एतत्क्रियायाः प्रतिवेष्टनमर्थः । एवं मूर्धन्यानामुच्चारो भवति । १.१.२३. षकारस्य द्रोणिका । Whitney (1.23). G: 1.1.23. Translation: For the sound ṣ, the bowl-[shaped tongue is the articulator]. Note: Whitney feels that ṣ should not have been singled out for a special treatment among the cerebral sounds, and that this rule may have been “very possibly a later interpolation in the text of our treatise. … It can hardly be claimed that this rule adds to the distinctness of our apprehension of the char- acter of this sibilant, which is clearly enough exhibited by its relation to the other lingual sound.” In any case, the rule is found in all manuscripts, and there is no reason to consider it to be an interpolation, cf. TPR (2.45): करणमध्यं तु विवृतम्. In contrast to Whitney, Allen (1953: 26) admiringly calls this: “a rather more graphic description,” and cites a similar description by Grammont. The commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara also adds some graphic description of its own. While for the other cerebral sounds, it is the rolled back tip of the tongue which becomes the articulator, the pronunciation of ṣ was supposed to be done in such a way that the middle of the tongue had a dip, and the lower sides of the front edges of the tongue touched the sides of the palatal region. The Āpiśaliśikṣā says that all cerebral sounds are produced with “the part next to the tip, or the under-side of the tip,” Allen (1953: 53). It is possible that the CA made a distinction between the rest of the cerebral sounds and the ṣ. The CA distinction is at least internally well supported, because it says that the middle of the articulator remains open, i.e. without contact. Thus, the tongue turned into a bowl-like shape, the sides of the front of the touched the sides of the curvature of the oral cavity, leaving the middle without contact. In contrast with this, the tip of the tongue had a direct contact in the pronunciation of cere- bral stops. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - षकारस्य द्रोणिका करणं भवति । ‘षडा॑हुः शी॒तान् षडु॑ मा॒सः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१७)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका135 भा.भा.वृत्ति - षकारो मूर्धन्यः । तस्योच्चारे जिह्वाया द्रोणिकां कृत्वा जिह्वापार्श्वाधोभागौ मूर्ध(G: र्धा)प्रान्तयोः संस्पर्शयेत् । एवंक्रियाकरणे षकारोच्चारो भवति । अत एवोक्तं द्रोणिकेति । १.१.२४. दन्त्यानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रस्तीर्णम् । Whitney (1.24). G: 1.1.24. Most mss. read jivhāgram. Translation: For dental sounds, the tip of the tongue spread flat [is the articulator]. Note: Whitney translates prastīrṇa as ‘thrust forward,’ and this might imply that the tip of the tongue was pressed against the upper teeth. The com- mentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara, on the other hand, lends support to Allen’s (1953: 56) rendering of prastīrṇa as ‘spread, flat.’ The commentary describes the tongue as spread out flat like the leaf of a Vaṭa ‘banyan’ tree. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दन्तस्थानानां वर्णानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रस्तीर्णं करणं भवति । लसतथदधन । ‘दन्ता(H, N: न्त्या) लसतवर्गाणाम् ।’ (वर्णपटलम्, २२) Note: According to the CAB, the only dental sounds are l, s, and the t-series. The sound l̥ is included among the velars (jihvāmūlīya). In the verse cited in the CAB, the reading *dantyā for dantā is found in the mss. A and E of Varṇapaṭala, but dantā is supported by the other mss (Bolling and Negelein, 1910: 303). भा.भा.वृत्ति - दन्तेषु भवाः दन्त्याः । ऌकारलकारसकार- तवर्गाः (G: र्गः)। ऌलसतथदधन । एतेषामुच्चारणे प्रस्तीर्णं प्रसृतवटपत्रवत् जिह्वाग्रं दन्तमूलस्पर्शि भवति । तदा स्फुट उच्चारः स्यात् ।

136अध्याय १, पाद १ Note: In contrast with the CAB and the verse cited therein, the late tradition recorded in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary treats l̥ to be a dantya sound. It is clear that Bhārgava-Bhāskara follows here the late Pāṇinian school. At the same time, Bhārgava-Bhāskara seems to give an explanation of the articulation of dentals which makes them more like dantamūlīya. Accord- ing to him the tip of the tongue touches the root of the teeth (जिह्वाग्रं दन्तमूलस्पर्शि भवति). If the blade of the tongue is truly flat, we would expect a true dental, rather than an alveolar pronunciation. It is not clear whether Bhārgava- Bhāskara intends the normal pronunciation of dentals to be more like the alveolars, or just that a clear enunciation (sphuṭa-uccāra) of the dentals was more like alveolars. One possible interpretation of these comments is that even though the CA calls these sounds dentals, they were pronounced like alveolars in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s own tradition. The RPR (1.9) also supports the alveolar pronunciation for the sounds which are normally considered to be dentals. It is of some interest to note that Bhārgava-Bhāskara generally follows the tradition of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā, and that there is no support for the alveolar pronunciation of dentals in that text. Thus, the source of this deviation remains somewhat obscure. १.१.२५. ओष्ठ्यानामधरौष्ठ[्य]म् । Whitney (1.25), G: 1.1.25: °ष्ठम्. All other manuscripts support the reading given above. However, I wonder whether the reading °ष्ठ्यम् is not an ancient error going back to the archetype of all the available manuscripts. Translation: For the labial sounds, the lower lip [is the ar- ticulator]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ओष्ठस्थानानां वर्णानामधरौष्ठं(H, N: ष्ठ्यं) करणं भवति । किं पुनः स्थानं किं करणम् । उत्त- रौष्ठं स्थानमधरौष्ठेन करणेनोपक्रम्यते । यदुपक्रम्यते तत् स्थानम् । येनोपक्रम्यते तत् करणम् । ओओ३औऔ३ पफबभम । पुरुषᳲपिबति । उऊऊ३ । ‘सन्ध्यक्षरेषु वर्णेषु वर्णान्तमोष्ठ्यमुच्यते । उपध्मानीयमुकारो वः पवर्गश्च(Whitney: no च) तथा मतः ॥’(Source ?)

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका137 Note: Notice that the cited verse includes v among the labials, while it is not included in the prose listing, perhaps because it is considered to be a labiodental (dantyoṣṭhya) sound. Here again, the cited verse represents an ear- lier tradition of classification, while the commentary represents a later tradition. There are two slightly different possibilities for v being classified earlier as an oṣṭhya sound. One possibility is that it was a true glide, more like the English w. The other possibility is that many texts considered teeth to be the articulator for v, but not its point of articulation, and hence in spite of its labio-dentality, it came to be listed as an oṣṭhya sound. The second possibility has greater textual justification in other phonetic treatises. For further details, see: Allen (1953: 57). Another important factor to note is that many Śikṣā texts do not distin- guish between the point or articulation and the articulator for labial sounds, while here the CA seems to make a determined effort to come up with an ar- ticulator for each sound. Compare also CA (1.1.19: कण्ठ्यानामधरकण्ठ्यः). Also compare: Varṇapaṭala 22bcd: … उवर्णस्त्वोष्ठ्य उच्यते । उपध्मानीय ओकारो वः पवर्गश्च तथा मताः ॥ भा.भा.वृत्ति - (ओष्ठ्यानामधरौष्ठम्) ओष्ठयोर्भवाः ओ- ष्ठ्याः । उकारः उपध्मानीयः पवर्गश्च वकारोऽपि । उ अᳲप अᳲफ पफबभमव। एतेषामुच्चारस्तु अधरः मुखप्रान्ता- धोभागः । ओष्ठः । मुखप्रान्तोर्ध्वभागः । अधरश्च ओष्ठश्च अधरौष्ठं प्राण्यङ्गत्वादेकवद्भावः (cf. ‘द्वन्द्वश्च प्राणितूर्यसेनाङ्गा- नाम्,’ पा. २.४.२)। अधरौष्ठस्पर्शनेन उच्चारः स्यात् । वकारस्य तु ऊर्ध्वदन्ताग्राधरस्पर्शेनोच्चारो भवति । पाणिनीये वकारस्य दन्तोष्ठ्यताया आम्नातत्वात् । Note: Here Bhārgava-Bhāskara lists v among the oṣṭhya sounds. However, he explains that v is an exception to other oṣṭhya sounds in that its articulator is ūrdhvadantāgra “tips of the upper teeth.” For his authority, he refers to the dantauṣṭhya “labio-dental” classification for v in the Pāṇinian tra- dition. The Pāṇinīya tradition, however, does not clearly distinguish between the sthāna and karaṇa for v. It is curious to note that the text of CA does not have a separate statement, like some other phonetic treatises, concerning the separate karaṇa for v. This makes us wonder if the original text did conceive

138अध्याय १, पाद १ of v as a dantauṣṭya sound. If v did not have a separate karaṇa of its own, apart from that of the other oṣṭhya sounds, and if it was more like the other oṣṭhya sounds, then it must have been a bilabial sound, like the English w. This may, perhaps, explain why the gap between v and b seemed much smaller within the Atharvaveda tradition, and a separate treatise listing the words with these two sounds, i.e. the text called Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, had to be developed within this tradition. Among modern Indian languages, the merger of v with b is seen more frequently in Bengali and the related eastern languages, and occa- sionally in the Hindi-speaking area, cf. Hindi bīs ‘twenty’. The close connec- tion of the Atharvaveda itself with the tradition of Vrātyas and the region of Magadha makes such an articulation of v a very old possibility. This may also hint at the eastern origin of the tradition of CA itself, along with that of the Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, though no manuscripts of the CA have been found in these eastern parts. १.१.२६. नासिक्यानां नासिका । Whitney (1.26). G: 1.1.26. Translation: For the sounds with the nose as their point of articulation, the nose [is also the articulator]. Note: Most Sanskrit texts do not distinguish between the point of ar- ticulation and the articulator for the nasal sounds. However, as seen in CA (1.1.19) and (1.1.25), the CA makes a unique effort to distinguish between the point of articulation and the articulator for each sound, even though, as in the present case, they turn out to be the same. Also, it is not immediately clear what the reference of the term nāsikya is, as distinct from that of the term anunāsika in the next rule. The commentaries include under the term nāsikya sounds which are generally recognized as anunāsika, e.g. ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m. Whitney suggests that the rule should properly apply to “merely the nāsikya and the yamas.” Here, the term nāsikya refers to a peculiar nasal sound, which is inserted between an h and the following n, ṇ, or m, and is equivalent to a nasalized h̐ cf. CA (1.4.9: हकारान्नासिक्येन), also see: Allen (1953: 77). How- ever, the tradition conceives it to be a pure nasal sound, rather than as a nasal- ized h. However, what about the yamas? If the yama corresponding to k is a nasalized k̐, then how is it possible to say that this sound is a pure nasal sound. For instance, the Nāradīśikṣā (Śikṣāsaṃgraha, p. 428; Allen, 1953: 76) says that the yama which comes between a non-nasal stop and a nasal is a

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका139 nasal sound homorganic with the preceding stop. Thus, it does not make sense to call it a pure nasal. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नासिकास्थानानां वर्णानां नासिका करणं भवति । ‘ब्रह्म॑’ (अ.वे. १.१९.४)। ‘पय॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. १.९.३)। कंखंगंघं । ङञणनमाः । ‘नासिक्ये नासिका स्थानं तथानुस्वार उच्यते । यमा वर्गोत्तमाश्चापि यथोक्तं चैव ते मताः ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, २३) Note: The Varṇapaṭala reads iṣyate for ucyate. Also note that the notation kaṃ-khaṃ-gaṃ-ghaṃ in the commentary refers to the so-called yamas, or the nasalized ‘twins,’ i.e. nasalized transitional segments which come after non-nasal stops, before nasals, cf. CA (1.4.8): समानपदेऽनुत्तमात् स्पर्शादुत्तमे यमैर्यथासंख्यम्. Also compare the doctrine of the TPR (21.12): स्पर्शाद- नुत्तमादुत्तमपरादानुपूर्व्यान्नासिक्याः. The TPR actually uses the term nāsikya to refer to these sounds, instead of using the term yama. This doctrine of yama as an additional transitional segment is different from the doctrine found in the RPR (6. verse 8): स्पर्शा यमाननुनासिकाः स्वान् परेषु स्पर्शेष्वनुनासिकेषु, which teaches that non-nasal stops, before nasal stops, are replaced by the corresponding yamas. In this procedure, the yamas may be said to be nasalized allophones for non- nasal stops, before nasals. I thank George Cardona for bringing this reference to my attention. भा.भा.वृत्ति - नासिकायां भवा नासिक्याः । ङञणनमअं । वर्गाणां पञ्चमाः अनुस्वारश्च । तेषां मध्ये अनुस्वारस्य नासिकास्थानमुच्चारणे। अन्येषां तु स्वस्ववर्गस्थानं नासिका चेति स्थानद्वयेनोच्चारो भवति । ङस्य जिह्वामूलनासिकम् । ञस्य तालुनासिकम् । णस्य मूर्धनासिकम् । नस्य दन्त- नासिकम् । मस्यौष्ठनासिकमिति । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara omits the yamas from the list of nasal sounds, and this may also be a reflection of his reliance on the late Pāṇinian school, where the yamas are not given a proper place. The yamas are included

140अध्याय १, पाद १ neither in the Śivasūtras, nor referred to in the rules of Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī. Thus, one can conclude that using the Pāṇinian tradition for the elucidation of a Prātiśākhya text is on the whole a regressive development, and this is what we see in the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara. The confusion of the notion of nāsikya and anunāsika continues in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary. १.१.२७. अनुनासिकानां मुखनासिकम् । Whitney (1.27). G: 1.1.27. P reads मुखनासिका. Translation: For the nasalized sounds, the oral [organ, as well as,] the nose [are the articulators]. Note: Like several previous rules, e.g. CA (1.1.19, 25-26), this rule makes a vain effort to distinguish between the articulator and the point of arti- culation for nasalized sounds, and ends up identifying the same organs as both the point of articulation and the articulator. Here, there is also an additional problem, which neither the CA nor the commentators address clearly. What is the distinction between the nāsikya sounds and the anunāsika sounds? The commentators are clearly confused over this issue. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनुनासिकस्थानानां वर्णानां मुखना- सिकं करणं भवति । ‘द्वे च॑ मे विंश॒तिश्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५. २)। ‘ति॒स्रश्च॑ मे त्रिं॒शच्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.३)। ‘चत॑स्रश्च मे चत्वारिं॒शच्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.४)। ‘पुमा॑न् पुं॒सः’ (अ.वे. ३. ६.१)। ‘तत्र॑ पुं॒सव॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.१)। ‘मुखनासिकेन ये वर्णा उच्यन्ते तेऽनुनासिकाः । समानास्यप्रयत्ना ये ते सवर्णा इति स्मृताः ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, १२) Note: Interestingly, the only sound included by the CAB under the category of anunāsika is the anusvāra. It leaves out the nasal vowels and con- sonants which are generally referred to by this term in the Sanskrit phonetic texts. Strangely, the CAB uses the word anunāsikasthāna as if the word anu- nāsika referred to a point of articulation. There is no such sthāna-expression in

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका141 Sanskrit, and the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya is simply giving a paraphrase of the ex- pression anunāsika, which is comparable to its paraphrases of expressions in earlier rules, cf. oṣṭhya = oṣṭhasthāna, dantya = dantasthāna, nāsikya = nāsikā- sthāna. In this case, majority of the mss. for the Varṇapaṭala (= ABCETU) give the reading mukhanāsikena. This is rejected by Bolling and Negelein in favor of the minority reading mukhanāsike ye varṇā. With the concurrence of reading from the mss. of the CAB, the reading mukhanāsikena gains in probability. Whether nāsikā is a sthāna or karaṇa for the anunāsika sounds is not quite clear from the statement of the rule, and the commentary does not help either. The expression mukhanāsika seems to refer to a joint mode of articula- tion, without making a further distinction between sthāna and karaṇa. At the same time, it is to be acknowledged that the term is a popular one. It is seen in the cited Śikṣā text, and is also used by Pāṇini in his rule P. 1.1.8 (मुखनासिका- वचनोऽनुनासिकः). For a number of sounds, the Apiśaliśikṣā (2.9: शेषाः स्वस्थान- करणाः) openly declares that the sthāna and the karaṇa is the same organ. Among these are the kaṇṭhya, oṣṭhya, nāsikya, and anunāsika sounds. The Pāṇinian commentators do make a distinction in the status of nāsikā in relation to different sounds. For details, see: Deshpande (1975: 11), Bare (1980: 138). The verse cited in the commentary is also important in that it is the only other ancient text, besides Pāṇini 1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्) and the VPR 1.43 (समानस्थानकरणास्यप्रयत्नः सवर्णः), to use the term āsyaprayatna in relation to a definition of the term savarṇa, see: Deshpande (1975: 92). Verses 13-15 of the Varṇapaṭala are related to savarṇa and savarṇagrahaṇa: ह्रस्वो वर्णपरस्तस्य सवर्णस्य च वाचकः । ह्रस्वोत्तरस्तु दीर्घोऽपि तस्मात्तस्यैव वाचकः ॥ वर्गान्तरस्तु वर्गादिर्वर्गस्य ग्राहको मतः । वर्गाणां च यथासंख्यं प्रथमादित्वमिष्यते ॥ अकारेणोच्यतेऽतस्तु कारो यस्मात्परो भवेत् । तस्य तद्ग्रहणम् बोध्यं ककारोऽत्र निदर्शनम् ॥ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अनुनासिकानां स्वराणां तु मुखशब्देन मुखा- न्तर्गतकण्ठादिस्थानानि ज्ञेयानि तानि नासिकया सहितानि स्थानानि ज्ञेयानि तद्यथा - अकारस्य कण्ठनासिकम् । इका- रस्य तालुनासिकम् उकारस्य ओष्ठनासिकम् । ऋकारस्य

142अध्याय १, पाद १ मूर्धनासिकम् । ऌवर्णस्य दन्तनासिकम् । एऐ अनयोः कण्ठ- तालुनासिकम् । ओऔ अनयोः कण्ठोष्ठनासिकम् । यकारस्य तालुनासिकम् वकारस्य दन्तोष्ठनासिकम् । लकारस्य दन्तनासिकमिति । ‘म॒हाँ अ॑सि’ (अ.वे. १.२०.४) । ‘आ ब॑भूवाँ३’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। ‘प॒णी ँर॒भि’ (अ.वे. ५.११.७)। ‘दस्॑यूँरु॒त’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.६)। ‘पु॒रु॒ष्टु॒त॒ँ एकः॑’ (अ.वे. २०.६१.६)। ‘ऊँ इति’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.४.५)। ‘नॄँः प्रणेता’ (‘प्रणेत्रम्,’ ऋग्वेदखिलानि, प्रैषाध्यायः, १.३)। ऋग्वेदे । ‘सँय्य॑तम्’ (अ.वे. १०.४.८)। ‘स॒ँव्व॒त्स॒रः’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.८)। ‘जि॒गी॒वाँल्ल॒क्षम्’ (अ.वे. २०.३४.४)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara says that nasal e and ai have kaṇṭhatālu- nāsikam as their points of articulation, implying that the non-nasal ones have kaṇṭhatālu as their points of articulation. The inclusion of e, and similarly the inclusion of o, among sounds with double points of articulation is a relatively late phenomenon seen mostly in texts which follow the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. Bhārgava-Bhāskara on the next rule actually quotes the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā to this effect. It is not clear why Bhārgava-Bhāskara does not list the nasal stops under the category of anunāsika. His description of these sounds given in the commentary under the previous rule exactly matches the description of anunāsika sounds given here. १.१.२८. रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि । Whitney (1.28). G: 1.1.28. Translation: For r, the roots of the teeth (i.e. alveolar ridge) [is the articulator]. Note: This rule indicates that the text of the CA itself is confused over the notions of the point of articulation (sthāna) and the articulator (karaṇa). Generally, the articulator is the moving organ and the point of articulation is the relatively stationary part in the oral tract. Here, one would naturally expect a portion of the tongue, such as the tip of the tongue, to be the articulator, while the alveolar ridge or the roots of the teeth would be the point of articulation. The Śikṣā verse cited by the CAB correctly describes dantamūla as a point of

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका143 articulation (sthāna). On the other hand, the CAB itself is philologically accu- rate in interpreting the CA rule to mean that dantamūla is an articulator (ka- raṇa). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि करणं भवति । ‘श॒रदः॑ पुरू॒ची रा॒यः’ (अ.वे. २.१३.३)। ‘पुना रक्तं वासः’ (not in known Vedic texts, quoted in the KV on P.1.3.14: ro ri)। ‘पुना॑ रू॒पाणि॑’ (अ.वे. १.२४.४)। ‘ज॒घ्नू रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ४.३७.१)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ८.३.२६)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्षः॑’ (अ.वे. १२.३.४३)। ‘रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि प्रत्यग्वा तेभ्य इष्यते । इति स्थानानि वर्णानां कीर्तितानि यथाक्रमम् ॥ अपर आह - हनुमूले तु (Whitney: -लेषु) रेफस्य दन्तमूलेषु वा पुनः । प्रत्यग्वा दन्तमूलेभ्यो मूर्धन्य इति चापरे ॥’ (= वर्णपटलम्, २४-२५) Note: Even the words अपर आह are found in the Varṇapaṭala. This may be an indication that the Varṇapaṭala is itself a conflation of earlier texts. The Varṇapaṭala reads हनुमूले तु रेफः स्यात् for हनुमूले तु रेफस्य. The example पुना रक्तं वासः cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, nor in any other Saṃhitā, Brāhmaṇa, Āraṇyaka, or Upaniṣad. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. However, his example is cited in the KV on P. 1.3.14 (रो रि). भा.भा.वृत्ति - रेफो मूर्धन्यः । दन्तमूलशब्दः सामीप्यं द्योत- यति बहुवचननिर्देशात् । दन्तमूलस्थानं मूर्धस्थानं च तयो- र्मध्ये रेफोच्चारणस्थानं ज्ञेयं तकारटकारोच्चारणस्थानयो- र्मध्यस्थानमित्यर्थः । सन्ध्यक्षराणि तु स्थानद्वयोच्चारितानि

144अध्याय १, पाद १ ज्ञेयानि । तथा च पाणिनीये - ‘एऐ तु कण्ठतालव्या ओऔ कण्ठोष्ठजौ स्मृतौ’ ॥ (पाणिनीयशिक्षा, १८) इति शिक्षायां पठितम् । अथ प्रयत्नानाह - Note: The rule to says that dantamūla is the karaṇa for r. On the other hand, Bhārgava-Bhāskara disregards the context of karaṇa for this rule, and treats dantamūla not only as a sthāna, but as an indication of the vicinity of the real sthāna for this sound, namely mūrdhan. Treating r as a mūrdhanya, when the rule clearly says that it is dantamūlīya, shows how the characteri- zations in the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā override the explicit statements of the CA. The Śikṣā cited in the CAB reports that there are different views regarding the point of articulation for r and that mūrdhanya and dantamūlīya are some of the alternative classifications for it. It does not try to interpret the term dantamūlīya as a near synonym for mūrdhanya, and to this extent, it shows that it is not as much influenced by the Pāṇinian school. Allen (1953: 54) says that while the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā describes r as being a retroflex sound, “the Prātiśākhyas generally require an alveolar articulation (which agrees with the present pronunciation of Sanskrit and the general prac- tice of the modern Indo-Aryan languages).” There are two points to be noted here. The first point, as brought out by Allen (1953: 53), is that r (as well as r̥) functions phonologically as a member of the retroflex class, in spite of the probable dialectal variation in its phonetic value. I have suggested (Deshpande, 1979: 284) that it is this phonological retroflexion of r and r̥ which was eventu- ally confused with phonetic retroflexion in later times, perhaps under the pres- sure of facilitating grammatical procedures like substitutions being decided in terms of maximal featural similarity between an original item and its substitute (cf. P.1.1.50: स्थानेऽन्तरतमः). The second point to note is that the notion of karaṇa receives only scant attention in the later Pāṇinian tradition, as compared to the notion of sthāna. This is also because the maximum featural similarity (āntaratamya) between substitutes and their originals is decided in terms of the sthāna, but not the karaṇa. With a diminishing understanding of factors like karaṇa, the later Pāṇinian tradition in fact becomes much less interested in the true phonetic descriptions of the Sanskrit sounds, except as required to facilitate the procedures of savarṇagrahaṇa and āntaratamya. The verse ‘एऐ तु कण्ठ्यतालव्यौ …’ is also found in the Śaunakaśikṣā (p. 15).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका145 १.१.२९. स्पृष्टं स्पर्शानां करणम् । Whitney (1.29). G: 1.1.29. Translation: In the case of stops (lit. ‘contact sounds’), the articulator is in contact [with the point of articulation]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्पृष्टं स्पर्शानां करणं भवति । कचट- तपाः । ‘स्वरमध्ये डढौ यत्र पीडनं तत्र वर्जयेत् । मृदुप्रयत्नावुच्चार्याविडा॑ (अ.वे. ५.१२.८) मी॒ढं (अ.वे. ४.२९.४) निदर्शनम् ॥’ (Source?) Note: The Śikṣā verse cited by the CAB says that, in intervocalic contexts, the sounds ḍ and ḍh are not to be pronounced as normal sparśa sounds with full contact of the articulator and the point of articulation, but should be pronounced without pressing the articulator against the point of arti- culation, and that they should be pronounced with a light articulatory effort. This description makes these sounds into flaps, similar to the intervocalic ḷ and ḷh of the R̥gveda. This doctrine is not known to the CA itself, and may have developed later on, perhaps under the influence of the RV tradition. It is also not recorded by the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara, and it is not known to the late text, the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā. It is not clear if the presence of such a descrip- tion of ḍ and ḍh points to a distinct source for the ancient Śikṣā cited by the CAB. भा.भा.वृत्ति - कादयो मावसानाः पञ्चविंशतिः स्पर्शाः । तेषां करणमाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नः स्पृष्टसंज्ञको ज्ञेयः । पदान्तं स्पृशन्ति ते स्पर्शाः । अत एव तेषां स्पृष्टं करणम् । Note: The commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara uses the term prayatna to refer to different modes of contact between the articulator and the point of articulation. This is the meaning of this term in the Pāṇinian school. On the other hand, the term probably meant articulatory effort in a generic sense, and this is the sense seen in the term mr̥duprayatna used in the verse cited in the CAB. A similar meaning for the term prayatna must be seen in the term laghu-

146अध्याय १, पाद १ prayatnatara used by Pāṇini (8.3.18: व्योर्लघुप्रयत्नतरः शाकटायनस्य). It seems likely that the term prayatna had the same generic meaning of articulatory effort in the term āsyaprayatna used by both Pāṇini (1.1.9: तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्) and the Śikṣā text quoted the CAB on CA 1.1.27. १.१.३०. ईषत्स्पृष्टमन्तस्थानाम् । Whitney (1.30). G: 1.1.30. I: 30. G alone reads: °मन्तःस्थानाम्, and Whitney has the same reading. Translation: In the case of semi-vowels, [the articulator] is in slight contact [with the point of articulation]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ईषत्स्पृष्टमन्तस्थानां करणं भवति । भा.भा.वृत्ति - (ईषत्स्पृष्टमन्तस्थानाम्) पदस्यान्तस्तिष्ठन्ति न तु पदान्ते अतोऽन्तस्थाः यरलवाः । अन्तस्थशब्दः स्त्रीपुंस- लिङ्गः । तेषां वा तासां वा अन्तःस्थानां करणमाभ्यन्तर- प्रयत्नः ईषत्स्पृष्टो ज्ञेयः । पदान्तविरामे नैव दृश्यन्ते । क्षैप्र- विसर्गसन्धौ ईषन्मनाक् पदान्तं स्पृशन्ति । अत उक्तमीष- त्स्पृष्टमिति । Note: It is not clear whether the original term was anta-sthā or antaḥ- sthā. The problem becomes more complicated because an underlying antaḥ+sthā can as well result in the surface form antasthā in certain dialects of Sanskrit. As the Aitareya-Āraṇyaka (3.2.1) informs us, the earlier categories recognized by its author’s tradition were only three, i.e. vowels (svara), stops (sparśa), and spirants (ūṣman). This text informs us that the scholar Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya proposed the addition of antaḥsthā, and that this new addition was not acceptable to its author. One possible explanation of the term anta-sthā might refer to this fact of this category being the last addition. The reading antaḥ-sthā has been discussed at length by Allen (1953: 29): “The Sanskrit term for the category of semivowels is anta(ḥ)sthā, lit. ‘standing between’. It is tempting, and has tempted modern commentators, to interpret this term as referring to the postulated ‘intermediate’ degree of contact discussed above, or, like our term ‘semi-vowel’, to their phonological alternation. The ending -sthā, ‘standing’, however, is more readily applicable to the place which these letters

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका147 occupy in the alphabet, viz. between the stops and the fricatives; and it is doubtful whether the ancient sources provide evidence for any other inter- pretation.” Of course, Allen does not consider the reading anta-sthā, which is uniformly used by all the manuscripts of the CA. It is, however, clear that the commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara explains this word as if it were antaḥ-sthā. Allen (1953: 27-28) further discusses the question of whether a sepa- rate prayatna for semi-vowels, apart from that of the vowels is justified. Appa- rently, it seems at first glance like a failure of the Indian phoneticians that they do not see the distinction between vowels and semi-vowels as being phono- logical, than phonetic. However, Allen appropriately refers to palatographic studies of Indian languages which justify the claim of the Indian phoneticians that the semi-vowels involve a slight degree of contact between the articulator and the point of articulation, as compared to that of the vowels. Also, one should remember that the Indian phoneticians were aware of the various degrees of contact involved in the pronunciation of sounds like y and v, depending upon whether they occurred word-initially or medially. Thus, the use of expressions like ati-saṃspr̥ṣṭa-prayatna, laghu-prayatna-tara, and mr̥du- prayatna should be sufficient to indicate the fineness of their observations. Many of these are justified by the palatographic evidence, as well as by what happens to these sounds in Prākrit languages. One should also keep in mind that the distinction between ‘phonological’ versus ‘phonetic’ is a particularly Western distinction, and while there are echoes of this distinction in the con- cerns of the Indian grammarians and phoneticians, one should not expect to see it overtly implemented in their works. The Māṇḍūkīśikṣā does not know the categories of īṣatspr̥ṣṭa and īṣad- vivr̥ta. It says that the karaṇa for stops is spr̥ṣṭa, while for the semi-vowels, it is the opposite, i.e. aspr̥ṣṭa, see: स्पर्शानां करणं स्पृष्टमन्तःस्थानामतोऽन्यथा (verse 70, Śikṣāsaṃgraha, p. 469). Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s explanation of the īṣatspr̥ṣṭa as ‘touching (= oc- curring in) the word-final position lightly (i.e. only as a result of certain exter- nal sandhi operations),’ is indeed far from what is intended by the text of the CA. १.१.३१. ऊष्मणां विवृतं च । Whitney (1.31). N, L, O: उ for ऊ. A, B, L: °ष्माणां विवृतमं. G: 1.1.31. O: °विवृत्तं च. Translation: For the spirants, [the articulator remains] also [slightly?] open [or open, besides being in slight contact?].

148अध्याय १, पाद १ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उष्मणां विवृतं च करणं भवति । ईषत्स्पृष्टं च। शषसहाः । भा.भा.वृत्ति - (ऊष्मणां विवृतम्) शषसहा ऊ(G: उ)- ष्माणः । पदान्ते स्वरूपेण न दृश्यन्ते । क्वचित्कवर्गटवर्ग- तवर्गतां विसर्गत्वं च संप्राप्य विकृता भवन्ति । ‘ऊष रुजा- याम्’ (पाणिनीयधातुपाठ, ६८३)। ऊष्माणो विकृता रुग्णा इत्यर्थः । ‘वि॒ड्भ्यः’ (अ.वे. ३.३.३)। ‘षट्’ (अ.वे. ४.११. १)। ‘मा॒द्भ्यः’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.१०)। ‘गो॒धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७. ७३.६)। ‘दि॒ग्भ्यः’ (अ.वे. ४.४०.८)। ‘तु॒रा॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। एषामूष्मणामाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नः विवृतसंज्ञः । मुखस्य विवरणाद्विवृतमिति संज्ञा । Note: The interpretation of this rule given in the CAB concludes that the articulator of the ūṣmans is both vivr̥ta and īṣatspr̥ṣṭa. Following this commentary, Whitney says: “the organ is both in partial contact and open - a rather awkward way of saying, apparently, that its position is neither very close nor very open.” Whitney does not reject such an interpretation, and, with the word ca in the rule, this is indeed one of the ways to render this rule. Allen (1953: 26) notes that the notion that the spirants do involve some contact and some openness is justifiable on the basis of texts like TPR (ii.45), as well as on the basis of modern palatographic studies of Indian language. TPR (ii.45) suggests that the spirants are produced at the same points of articulation as the homorganic stops, but that in the case of the spirants, the middle of the articu- lator remains in an open position (करणमध्यं तु विवृतम्). On the other hand, if we remove the ca from this rule following some of the mss. which do not have it, and if we follow Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s reading of the rule and its interpretation, we can take this rule to mean that the articulator remains in an open position in the pronunciation of spirants, and, then, by the next rule, so also for vowels. Such a reading is also justified in view of a likely citation of this rule in the MB (on P.1.1.10). Then there is the possibility that only the word īṣat, and not īṣatspr̥ṣṭa, continues into this rule from the previous rule by the force of ca. This would give us īṣadvivr̥ta as the mode of articulation for spirants, which accords well with some of the late texts in the Pāṇinian tradition, cf. Laghusiddhānta-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका149 kaumudī, on P.1.1.9 (ईषद्विवृतमूष्मणां, विवृतं स्वराणाम्). Such an interpretation is suggested by a likely quotation of this rule in the MB (on P.1.1.10), and Patañjali’s interpretation of it. Patañjali says: विवृतमूष्मणामीषदित्येव अनुवर्तते. If one accepts this interpretation, then one would have to say that, after this rule, īṣat is discontinued, and only the word vivr̥ta continues into the next rule describing vowels. This is what Patañjali has proposed. Such an interpretation is also supported by the interpretive maxim: चानुकृष्टं नोत्तरत्र, cf. Paribhāṣendu- śekhara, Paribhāṣā 78. While the versified Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 21) says that vowels and spi- rants share the same open (vivr̥ta) articulatory effort (स्वराणामूष्मणां चैव विवृतं करणं स्मृतम्), the prose version of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (3.6-8) reflects the unre- solved situation as described above: ईषद्विवृतकरणा ऊष्माणः, विवृतकरणा वा, विवृत- करणाः स्वराः. One may note with interest the fact that the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, which is clearly later than the CA, does not seem to know the distinction between vivr̥ta and īṣadvivr̥ta. It ascribes vivr̥ta to both vowels and spirants (विवृतं च स्वरोष्मणाम्, verse 70, p. 469). As Whitney himself notes, the TPR (ii.44, 45) and RPR (xiii.3, r.11) holds that both spirants and vowels do not involve contact (aspr̥ṣṭa). Such also must be Pāṇini’s own view, i.e. that the vowels and spirants had the same mode of approximation of the articulator. Only with such an assumption can one explain the formulation of P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ). It prohibits homogeneity (sāvarṇya) between vowels and consonants. However, the only possibility for vowels and consonants sharing the same point of articulation and oral effort is for vowels and spirants. १.१.३२. स्वराणां च । Whitney (1.32). G: 1.1.32. No such Sūtra in A, B, L, O. Translation: Also for vowels, [the articulator remains open]. Note: See the Note on the previous rule for a detailed discussion of textual problems. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वराणां विवृतं करणं भवति । अआ- आ३ इईई३ उऊऊ३ ऋॠॠ३ ऌलॄलॄ३ ए[ए३] ऐऐ३ ओ[ओ३] औऔ३ ।

150अध्याय १, पाद १ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अत्र स्वराः समानसंज्ञाः सन्ध्यक्षराणि च । अइउऋऌएऐओऔ । एषां नवानां स्वराणां च विवृतसंज्ञः प्रयत्नो ज्ञेयः । Note: Note that both the commentaries list the short a among vowels while stating that the effort of the vowels is vivr̥ta. This, of course, has to be negated in view of CA (1.1.36) which says that the effort for a is saṃvr̥ta. १.१.३३. एकेऽस्पृष्टम् । Whitney (1.33). G: 1.1.33. A, B, and L: no such Sūtra. G and K show the Avagraha. Translation: Some hold that, [for vowels, the articulator is] not in contact [with the point of articulation, in contrast with saying that the articulator is in an open position]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकेऽस्पृष्टं स्वराणां करणं ब्रुवते । अपरे विवृतम् । एतान्येवोदाहरणानि । Note: Whitney on this rule does not read the Avagraha either in the rule or in the commentary and this has misled him into reading the text as एके स्पृष्टम् and translating it as: “Some consider it as forming a contact.” He be- lieved that the rule and the commentator are citing an opinion that “in the utter- ance of the vowels the organs are in contact; others that they remain open.” This interpretation led him to comment: “The former opinion is too obviously and grossly incorrect, one would think, to be worth quoting.” Allen (1953: 28) seems to take the reading given in Whitney’s edition seriously, and tries to find other evidence from phonetic treatises which say that even vowels involve some contact: “It is presumably to isolated statements such as these (= TPR ii.24, Vyāsaśikṣā 284) that the AP (= CA) is referring when it gives as the opinion of some sources that contact is involved in the vowels, an opinion which Whitney impatiently dismisses as ‘… too obviously and grossly incor- rect, one would think, to be worth quoting.’” In fact, the entire discussion by Whitney and Allen is now outdated, and one must read the rule as eke+aspr̥ṣṭam, and this is supported by several manuscripts with a clear avagraha. This is also clear from both the commentaries. The alternatives are the aspr̥ṣṭa ‘non-contact’ view, versus the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका151 vivr̥ta ‘openness’ view, and this makes perfect sense. For details on this division of opinion, see: Deshpande (1976a). The main advantage in choosing the vivr̥ta classification over the aspr̥ṣṭa classification is that, while it is difficult to think of gradations of aspr̥ṣṭa ‘non-contact,’ it is perfectly possible to think of gradations of vivr̥ta ‘open.’ Such gradations are seen in the use of the terms īṣadvivr̥ta ‘slightly open,’ vivr̥tatara ‘more open,’ and vivr̥tatama ‘most open.’ While the notion of īṣadvivr̥ta may have been merely alluded to in CA (1.1.31), the next rule, i.e. CA (1.1.34), actually uses the term vivr̥tatama. It thus makes sense to conclude that the vivr̥ta classification was the preferred way for the CA, but it wishes to record the aspr̥ṣṭa alternative upheld by other traditions. भा.भा.वृत्ति - मुख्याः आचार्याः स्वरमात्रस्य अस्पृष्टं करण- माहुः । न स्पृशति परस्परमोष्ठद्वयम् । मुखमुद्रणं न भवती- त्यर्थः । मुखस्य विवरणे स एवार्थः । एवं च विवृत- स्यैवापरपर्यायः अस्पृष्टमिति । स्वराणां पृथक्त्वज्ञानाय असन्दे- हार्थं करणस्य नामान्तरमुक्तम् । यद्वा अस्पृष्टम् । ईषत्स्पृष्ट- शब्दात्स्पृष्टशब्दाभावं कृत्वा चकाराद्विवृतमनुवर्त्य ईषद्विवृत- मिति स्वराणां प्रयत्नो ज्ञेयः । अयमर्थ एव समीचीनः बहु- ग्रन्थेष्वपि ईषद्विवृतदर्शनात् । विरामे प्रयत्नविशेषमाह । Note: While Bhārgava-Bhāskara is correct in saying that the term īṣadvivr̥ta occurs in a number of texts on Sanskrit grammar and phonetics, he is alone in suggesting that this term refers to the effort for vowels. Such an interpretation cannot be correct. It is also clear that Bhārgava-Bhāskara does not understand the meaning of the term aspr̥ṣṭa. It does not refer to the lips not touching each other or the mouth not closing during the pronunciation of vowels. It rather refers to the fact that the articulator does not touch the point of articulation in the pronunciation of vowels, but only approximates it. The TPR (ii.31-34: स्वराणां यत्रोपसंहारस्तत्स्थानम्; यदुपसंहरति तत्करणम्; अन्येषां तु यत्र स्पर्शनं तत्स्थानम्; येन स्पर्शयति तत्करणम्) uses the term upasaṃhāra “approxi- mation/approaching” for this phenomenon, in contrast with the notion of contact (sparśa). The RPR (13.11: स्वरानुस्वारोष्मणामस्पृष्टं स्थितम्) uses the term aspr̥ṣṭa, while the Pāṇinian tradition generally uses the term vivr̥ta.

152अध्याय १, पाद १ १.१.३४. एकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम् । Whitney (1.34), E, F (orig), H, I (orig), J (corr), M, N: एका°. D, J (orig): °र्विवृतमं. F (corr), G, I (corr), K: ऐकारौकारयो°. F (corr), G, I (corr): एकारौकारयोर्विवृततरमैकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम् । G: 1.1.34. A, B, and L: no such Sūtra. O: विवृत्ततमं. Translation: For e and o, [the articulator remains in] the most open [position]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकारौकारयोर्विवृततमं करणं भवति। ‘एके॑ तरन्ति’ (अ.वे. ६.१२२.२)। ‘ओको॑ अस्य’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.५)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - (एकारौकारयोर्विवृततरमैकारौकारयोर्विवृत- तमम्) एकारश्च ओकारश्च अनयोः विरामे प्रयत्नः विवृत- तरो ज्ञेयः । ऐकारश्च औकारश्चानयोस्तु करणं विवृततमं ज्ञेयम् । सूत्रेषु स्पृष्टादीनां क्लीबता तु करणशब्दस्य विशेषण- त्वात् बोध्या । Note: The text of this rule and the next rule raises some important questions. The fact that the older commentary, the CAB, supports a version of this rule which deals only with e and o, and not with ai and au, makes one support the reading as given here as the older and the original reading. In comparison with other vowels, the vowels e and o are said to be most open (vivr̥tatama), and the next rule says that the effort for ā is even more open than that. The vowels ai and au are excluded from this discussion, not necessarily because they are less open, but because they are held to be dvivarṇa sounds, i.e. combinations of two vowels each, and hence they are not separately dis- cussed. This must be the original situation. Later on, as indicated by the later commentaries, these statements were modified to reflect further gradations. Thus, the version of these rules found in the late commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara says: e and o are more open, ai and au are most open, and ā is even more open than that. This version is supported by the Āpiśaliśikṣā, and the prose versions of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. The fact that the CAB does not yet show the impact of these other Pāṇinian sources perhaps

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका153 indicates its relatively early age. The later commentaries are explicit Pāṇinian interpretations of the CA. One should note that Patañjali himself does not use the notion of vivr̥ta- tama, though several Pāṇinian commentators ascribe it to him, cf. Bare (1980: 87), Deshpande (1975: 35). Patañjali differentiates e and o from ai and au in a different way. For him, the components of e and o are thoroughly fused (praśliṣṭa) with each other. On the other hand, ai and au are true composite sounds (samāhāravarṇau), cf. एवमप्यवर्णस्य एङोश्च सवर्णसंज्ञा प्राप्नोति । प्रश्लि- ष्टावर्णावेतौ । अवर्णस्य तर्ह्यैचोश्च सवर्णसंज्ञा प्राप्नोति । विवृततरावर्णावेतौ ।, MB (MLBD edn.), Vol. I, Sec. I, p. 62; and that the components of ai and au, i.e. a, i, and u, are vivr̥tatara ‘more open’, cf. यदत्रावर्णं विवृततरं तदन्यस्मादवर्णाद्ये अपीवर्णोवर्णे विवृततरे ते अन्याभ्यामिवर्णोवर्णाभ्याम्, MB (ibid.), p. 84. Also: इमावैचौ समाहारवर्णौ मात्रावर्णस्य मात्रेवर्णोवर्णयोः, MB (ibid), p. 78. This discussion offers an important insight into what probably hap- pened to the Sanskrit phonetic traditions in later times. If indeed the sounds ai and au are true diphthongs, or composed of two varṇas (dvivarṇa) as the ancient Indian tradition calls them, then it makes no sense to ascribe vivr̥tatama effort to these sounds, as their effort can only be the effort of the individual components. The description vivr̥tatama seems to suggest a more unitary char- acter to these sounds, which is not justifiable in terms of the ancient dvivarṇa characterization, but makes sense if the pronunciation of these sounds was something like what it is in modern standard Hindi. In modern standard Hindi, a Sanskrit word like maithilī is pronounced with the first vowel being almost equivalent to that in the English word ‘at.’ This may have been the phonetic basis for saying that ai and au are vivr̥tatama sounds. Such early mono- phthongization of ai and au, at least in certain dialects, may be suggested by the fact that Sanskrit ai and au are reduced to e and o in Prakrits, cf. Sanskrit mai- treya > Pāli metteya. The other reason to distinguish between the efforts of e and ai, and o and au, is that the later tradition considers these sounds to be kaṇṭhatālavya and kaṇṭhauṣṭhya respectively. Without the differentiation between their efforts, these sounds would become savarṇas with each other, and that would cause a great deal of confusion. Thus, it is possible that such a phonological reasoning may have led the later grammarians to distinguish between the efforts of these sounds. The importance of the original reading of this rule lies in that the older phonetic texts consider e and o to be essentially monophthongal like i and u. In that case, how would one distinguish i from e, and u from o? Such a necessity seems to have led to the differentiation in the degree of openness found in this

154अध्याय १, पाद १ rule and the next. The fact that the CA talks only about e and o should be taken as an indication of the monophthongal pronunciation for these vowels, and their inclusion in the category of sandhyakṣara essentially shows how the levels of phonetic and phonological considerations were blurred into each other. The possibility of such further differentiation in the degree of openness (vivr̥ta) makes this alternative more popular in later phonetic texts as compared to the undifferentiated category of non-contact (aspr̥ṣṭa), which in all likelihood is the earlier categorization. The lack of finer distinctions between the effort of vowels and sibilants forced Pāṇini to construct an explicit rule prohibiting the impending homo- geneity of vowels and consonants, i.e. P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ). If Pāṇini did not differentiate between the degree of openness between vowels and sibilants, it seems most unlikely that he differentiated between the degree of openness between the various vowels. Problems created by such a lack of finer differentiation must have led later grammarians and phoneticians to come up with finer distinctions. Thus, the emergence of these finer distinctions in the degree of openness are in all probability related to the emergence of careful thought regarding problems in the application of homogeneity and sound- substitution being decided in terms of featural proximity between the substitute and the original. This shows the possibility that phonological considerations may have led to further developments of phonetic classifications. Later com- mentators in the Pāṇinian tradition itself have often advocated the position that it better thing to accept a finer sub-classification of openness, and not worry about keeping P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ), cf. Deshpande (1975: 35, 170-171, notes 121-122). १.१.३५. ततोऽप्याकारस्य । Whitney (1.35). G: 1.1.35. Translation: [The articulator] for ā [remains in an] even more [open position]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ततोऽप्याकारस्य विवृततमं करणं भवति । ‘आशा॑नाम्’ (अ.वे. १.३१.१)। ‘शाला॑याः’ (अ.वे. ९.३.१)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका155 भा.भा.वृत्ति - पूर्वं स्वराणां सामान्यादाकारस्य ईषद्विवृतः प्रयत्न उक्त एव । विरामे प्रयत्नमाह । ततोऽपि पूर्वोक्तप्रयत्ना- दपि अधिकं करणमाकारस्य विरामे स्यात् । अधि(ति?)- विवृतमित्यर्थः । Note: It is interesting to note that the text of the CA moves from vivr̥ta to vivr̥tatama to ‘even more open than that.’ One would expect perhaps the use of vivr̥tatara to describe the position for e and o, and vivr̥tatama to de- scribe the position for ā. This felt gap in the terminology is made up by the later version of the previous rule found in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary: e and o are vivr̥tatara ‘more open,’ ai and au are vivr̥tatama ‘most open,’ and ā is even more open than that. As for Pāṇini, it seems that he probably did not distinguish the degrees of openness, beyond assuming that the short a was a saṃvr̥ta ‘close’ sound, in contrast with other vowels which were all open. १.१.३६. संवृतोऽकारः । Whitney (1.36). G: 1.1.36. G and K show the Avagraha. Translation: The sound a i[relatively] close[r vowel, in comparison with ā which is an open vowel]. Note: Note the different syntax of this rule. In the previous rules, words like vivr̥ta are neuter words, because they are used to modify the word karaṇam, which continues throughout this section. However, here the word saṃvr̥ta is used as a qualification of akāraḥ, and is, therefore, a masculine word. One can also raise another interesting question. When we say that ā is a most open sound, and that a is a closer sound, this openness or closeness, as a feature of the karaṇa refers not to the openness or closeness of the glottal aperture, but to the gap between the articulator and the point of articulation. For the vowels a and ā, however, the point of articulation given is kaṇṭha, and the articulator mentioned is the lower part of kaṇṭha. What sort of openness are we talking about that distinguishes between a and ā? It cannot be the relative openness of the glottal aperture. It must be the wider opening of the oral cavity, i.e. wider opening of the mouth. This point has not been discussed clearly by any Sanskrit text.

156अध्याय १, पाद १ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संवृतकरणः अकारो भवति । ‘अश्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३०.५)। ‘अ॒जः’ (अ.वे. ४.१४.१)। ‘अ॒ग्निः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - पूर्वं विवृतप्रयत्नः अकारस्योक्तः । स तु अविरामे ज्ञेयः । अवसाने तु अकारस्य संवृतप्रयत्नो ज्ञातव्यः। तथैवाह भगवान् पाणिनिः ‘अ अ’ (पा. ८.४.६८) इति । अ अकारः अवसाने अ इति भवति । संवृतो भवतीत्यर्थः । ननु अकारस्य द्विविधः प्रयत्न उक्तः स तु कथमनुभूयेत । श्रोतव्यम् । अविरामे अकारः प्रयुज्यते तदा मुखं विवृत- मुद्घाटितं स्यात् । विरामे तु अधः स्थितस्यौष्ठस्य द्रोणिकां कृत्वाऽधोदन्तपङ्क्तिमन्तर्धायोच्चारयेत् । स संवृतसंज्ञः । ‘अ॒ग्निम्’ (अ.वे. १.६.२)। ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.५.३) । Note: The Pāṇinian tradition holds that the short a is a saṃvr̥ta sound, while the long ā is a vivr̥ta sound. The CA classification is somewhat similar. However, since the CA does not present a featural definition of the notion of savarṇa, there is no dilemma within this text about how to have a and ā become savarṇas of each other, in spite of their featural difference. Pāṇini was indeed faced with such a dilemma, which he sought to resolve by artificially treating (or pronouncing?) a as a vivr̥ta sound within the grammatical derivational process, and reinstating the object language saṃvr̥ta a as the last step of all derivations, cf. P.8.4.68 (a a). The Śikṣā text quoted by the CAB (on CA 1.1.27), i.e. समानास्यप्रयत्ना ये ते सवर्णा इति स्मृताः, defines the notion of savarṇa in a way similar to that of Pāṇini 1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्). However, we have no information on how such a text would resolve the problem of homogeneity between a and ā. One should also note the interesting explanation given by Bhārgava-Bhāskara. He says that the vowel a is pronounced as an open (vivr̥ta) sound in non-final positions, but that it is pronounced as a close (saṃvr̥ta) sound when it occurs in the word-final position. While he describes openness as wider opening of the mouth (मुखं विवृतमुद्घाटितम्), the only such explantion known to me, his explanation of saṃvr̥ta is even more graphic: “having turned the lower lip into the shape of a cup (i.e. having rounded lower lip?), one should cover the lower teeth.” Such a description of a close a takes it closer to the pronunciation of the Bengali a (= ŏ). It is very doubtful if the ex-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका157 planation of saṃvr̥ta given by Bhārgava-Bhāskara is historically accurate as an interpretation of the CA or of Pāṇini. However, it does seem to have been based on some actual regional trait of pronunciation. This pronunciation of a must be clearly differentiated from a truly neutral position of all organs advo- cated for a by texts like TPR (1.113), cf. Allen (1953: 59). १.१.३७. संस्पृष्टरेफमृवर्णम् । Whitney (1.37). G: 1.1.37. Translation: [The members of] the r̥ class, [i.e. r̥, r̥̄, and r̥̄3, are] fused with [consonantal] r. Note: The above rule does not clearly define the nature of the fusion of the constituent elements. According to the general description in Sanskrit texts, in the constitution of a r̥ vowel, a consonantal r is flanked by two frac- tional vowels, i.e. ∂r∂. The actual phonetic quality of the vocalic fractions was probably determined by the consonants in the vicinity, though most Sanskrit texts tend to look at these vocalic fractions as partial a vowels. Some Sanskrit texts give more precise proportions of the vocalic and consonantal components for r̥ vowels. Thus, for instance, the Sarvasammataśikṣā (19) says that a short r̥ has four equal parts: There are two quarter-mora particles of the consonantal r in the middle flanked by quarter-mora vowels, i.e. ∂rr∂, cf. Allen (1953: 62). The Śikṣā verse cited by the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya seems to offer a close parallel: a half mora quantity of the consonantal r, flanked by quarter-mora vowels. Also see the Notes and the commentary on CA 1.4.10-11. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संस्पृष्टरेफमृवर्णं भवति । ‘इ॒दं पि॒तृ- भ्यः॒ प्र भ॑रामि ब॒र्हिः’ (अ.वे. १८.४.५१)। ‘पु॒त्रैर्भ्रातृ॑भि॒- रदि॑तिः॒’ (अ.वे. ६.४.१)। ऋवर्णस्य मध्ये युगपद्वचनो रः । ‘ऋवर्णे स्वरमात्रायाः (Whitney’s emendation: त्रा या) तस्या मध्येऽर्धमात्रया । रेफो भवति संसृष्टो यथाङ्गुल्या नखं तथा ॥ सूत्रे मणिरिवेत्येके तृणे क्रिमिरिवेति च । अनेन मात्रस्याद्यायाः (?) प्रश्लेषे ऊ(तू?) उभयोरपि (Source?)॥’

158अध्याय १, पाद १ Note: Referring to the description given by the Śikṣā verses quoted by the CAB, Allen (1953: 62) says that it is more picturesque than illuminating. The representation of the components of r̥ in the Sanskrit phonetic texts is further supported by the Avestan parallels such as p∂r∂∀u and k∂r∂p for Sanskrit pr̥thu and kl̥p-, cf. Wackernagel-Debrunner (1896-1954, Vol.I., p. 32). भा.भा.वृत्ति - ऋवर्णस्य वैचित्र्यं वर्णयति । सन्धौ स्पृष्टः । मध्ये प्रविष्टः संस्पृष्टः । संस्पृष्टः रेफो यस्मिन् सः संस्पृष्ट- रेफः । एतादृशं वर्णं जानीयात् । अयं भावः । ऋवर्णस्य आदौ अन्ते च स्वरविभागः। मध्ये रेफस्तिष्ठतीति जानी- यात् । ‘अर्च॑न्त्यृ॒ग्भिः’ (अ.वे. १२.१.३८)। ‘प्र॒शिष्यृ॒तस्य॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१२.११) । ‘शंसत्यृभुम्’ (?, ‘अर्च॑न्त्यृ॒भुम्,’ अ.वे. १.२.३)। ‘यद्यृणम्’ इत्यत्र ऋवर्णस्यादौ स्वरविभाग- त्वात् पूर्वपदान्तेऽन्तस्थापत्तिः । ‘स्व॒स्ति मा॒त्रे उ॒त पि॒त्रे’ (अ.वे. १.३१.४)। ‘धा॒त्रे वि॑धा॒त्रे’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.१०) इत्यत्र शब्दस्यान्ते स्वरविभागत्वादन्तस्थरेफापत्तिः । एवं चोदाहरणद्वयेनोभयत्र स्वरविभागोऽनुभूयते । ‘निर्ऋ॑तिर्’ इत्यत्र आदौ विसर्गस्य रेफः ततः स्वरविभागः । ततो रेफः पुनः स्वरविभागः इति । ये तु पूर्वं रेफः पश्चात्स्वरविभाग इति मन्यन्ते तदसत् । तादृङ्मानने निर्ऋतिशब्दे ‘रो रि’ (पा. ८.३.१४) इति लोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घता स्यात् । ‘नी- ऋती’ति अनिष्टरूपापत्तेरिदमुपेक्ष्यम् । मध्ये रेफोऽस्तीत्येव- मेवोचितम् । Note: The example śaṃsaty r̥bhum is not found in any Vedic text. The same is the case of the example yady r̥ṇam. Bhārgava-Bhāskara presents some interesting arguments why the r element in the vocalic r̥ must be situated between two vocalic fractions. He quotes an alternative view held by others that the r is situated in the beginning, followed by a vocalic fraction. Bhārgava- Bhāskara rejects such a view. It is interesting to note that such a view reflects the latter-day pronunciation of this vowel either as ri or ru. Such pronuncia-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका159 tions, if they were to be taken seriously, would lead to a lot of undesirable phonological consequences. Thus, while the actual pronunciation of r̥ did in- deed change, its phonological behavior remained like that of a vowel. While the sandhi rules remained an inherited and fixed feature of Sanskrit, the actual pronunciation of Sanskrit sounds was heavily influenced by the local factors. १.१.३८. दीर्घप्लुतयोः पूर्वा मात्रा । Whitney (1.38). G: 1.1.38. O, P: पूर्वमात्रा. Translation: For long and extra-long [r̥ vowels, i.e. r̥̄ and r̥̄3], the first mora [is fused with the consonantal r]. Note: This rule seems to say that in lengthening the r̥ vowels, it is the post-r vocalic fraction that is lengthened, and not the pre-r vocalic fraction. It also makes clear that the lengthening applies only to the vowel portion, and not to the consonantal portion. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घप्लुतयोस्तु पूर्वा मात्रा संस्पृष्टरेफ- मृवर्णं भवति। ‘कर्तॄन् आचक्ष्व’ (?, ‘क॒र्तन्न॑क्षस्व’, अ.वे. १०.१.१४)। ‘पि॒तॄँरुपे॒मम्’ (अ.वे. १८.४.४०)। Note: Referring to the text of the commentary संस्पृष्टरेफमृवर्णं भवति as it stands, Whitney says: this “is a palpable blunder for saṃspr̥ṣṭarephā bhavati.” भा.भा.वृत्ति - ह्रस्वऋवर्णस्यैकमात्रिकत्वात् स्वरभागस्य पादमात्रा । ततोऽर्धमात्रा रेफस्य ततः पादमात्रा रेफस्येति ज्ञेयम् । दीर्घप्लुतयोर्ऋवर्णयोस्तु मात्राविभाग उच्यते । दीर्घऋवर्णे द्विमात्रिके पूर्वा मात्रा स्वरस्य । ततोऽर्धमात्रा रेफस्य । ततोऽर्धमात्रा स्वरभागस्येत्यर्थः। प्लुतऋवर्णे पूर्वा मात्रा स्वरस्य । तत एका मात्रा रेफस्य । तत एका मात्रा स्वरस्येति ज्ञेयम् । Note: While the CAB on this rule is mostly uninformative, Bhārgava- Bhāskara seems to offer a very strange interpretation. Whitney appropriately interprets the rule to mean that only the first mora for r̥̄ and r̥̄3 is so combined

160अध्याय १, पाद १ with consonantal r. It is the subsequent vocalic element which undergoes lengthening. Whitney states in clear terms: “the r-element which it contains is not prolonged.” Bhārgava-Bhāskara, disregarding the wording of the rule, says that the middle third portion is the consonantal r, i.e. the r also undergoes the process of lengthening. For long r̥̄, his interpretation is especially strange. According to him. the first entire mātrā of long r̥̄ is purely vocalic, followed by a half-mātrā of consonantal r, followed by a half-mātrā of a vocalic element. This directly contradicts the statement of the rule: पूर्वा मात्रा संस्पृष्टरेफा भवति. १.१.३९. सलकारम्ऌवर्णम् । Whitney (1.39). C, Ha, N, E, F, I, O: °ऌ°. A, B, D, J, K, M, P: °मृवर्णं. G: 1.1.39. Translation: [The members of] the l̥-class, [i.e. l̥, l̥̄, and l̥̄3 , are fused] with [consonantal] l. Note: This rule, in close parallel with the previous rules, presents the constitution of l̥ as being equivalent to ∂l∂, or to ∂ll∂ if we accept each constitu- ent to be of a quarter-mora quantity. It is interesting to note that the CA uses the term l̥varṇa, suggesting that there are more varieties than just the short l̥. However, it does not have a specific rule for long (l̥̄) and prolonged (l̥̄3) vowels, corresponding to CA (1.1.38). The CAB does not cite any example of these long and prolonged varieties, though the Śikṣā verse cited in the com- mentary does refer to long l̥̄. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सलकारम् ऌवर्णं भवति । ‘अची॑कॢ- पत्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.३)। ‘प॒ञ्च॒द॒शेन॑ कॢ॒प्ताः’ (अ.वे. ८.९. १५)। ‘सि॒नी॒वा॒ल्य॑चीकॢपत्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.३)। ‘ऋवर्णवद् ऌवर्णो लः प्रश्लिष्टश्च यदा तयोः । ऌलॄ इति तदिच्छन्ति प्रयोगं तद्विदो जनाः ॥’ (Source?) Note: Whitney corrects the first quarter of the verse to: ऋवर्णे च ॠवर्णे लः. The cited verse is not a quotation from the Varṇapaṭalam, but from some other source. The Varṇapaṭalam (verse 33d: ऌवर्णे नास्ति दीर्घता) explicitly

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका161 rejects the existence of long l̥̄. On the other hand, the cited verse seems to accept it. भा.भा.वृत्ति - पूर्वसूत्रद्वयेन ऋवर्णस्य यादृगुक्तं तद्वत्सलका- रम्ऌवर्णं जानीयात् । स्वरभागयोर्मध्ये लकारं जानीयात् । ‘कृपो रो ल’ (पा. ८.२.१८) इति पाणिनीये । अत्रापि अग्रे कृपधातोर्ऋवर्णस्थरेफस्य लत्वविधानात् चाकॢपदित्यादौ एव ऌकारस्य दर्शनात् । ऌवर्णस्य दीर्घता तु मन्त्रशास्त्रे मातृ- कागणनेऽस्ति नान्यत्र । प्लुतस्तु क्वचिद्भवति । ‘ऌकारः प्लुत एव च’ (?) इति शौनकाचार्योक्तत्वात् । कॢप्तकॢप्ति- प्रभृतिशब्देषु ‘गुरोरनृत …’ (पा. ८.२.८६) इति प्लुत- सम्भवः । ‘अनृत’ इति पर्युदासः ऋऌवर्णसावर्ण्यादिह नेष्यते। अन्यथा प्लुतत्वासम्भवात् । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara offers some informative comments on vocalic l̥. He says that the long l̥̄ is not found in Sanskrit, except in the alpha- bets found in the Mantraśāstra. For details, see: Ramajñā Pāṇḍeya, Vyākaraṇa- darśanapīṭhikā, p. 51, Sarasvatī Bhavana Adhyayanamālā 11, Sampūrṇānanda Saṃskr̥ta Viśvavidyālaya, Banaras. There are actually several texts which accept the long l̥̄, though they cannot cite its occurrence in any attested word, cf. Manomohan Ghosh (1938: 51). On the other hand, it is possible to find an extra-long (pluta) l̥̄3 by applying the normal rules of Pāṇini. The pluta l̥̄3 is not attested among the Vedic examples of pluta vowels, though it is possible, according to the rules of the Pāṇinian system, to have a form with a pluta l̥̄3. There is a long debate concerning the inclusion of l̥ in Pāṇini’s Śivasūtra: r̥-l̥-K, and the MB (on the Śivasūtra: r̥-l̥-K) argues that one must include l̥ in the Śivasūtra r̥-l̥-K, in order to get a prolonged l̥̄3 in vocative forms like kl̥̄3ptaśikha. Bhārgava-Bhāskara alludes to this discussion. The quotation ऌकारः प्लुत एव च is not found in any known works ascribed to Śaunaka. It is, however, quoted by Ramadev Tripathi (1977: 75) as belonging to verse 5 of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. It appears in verse 2 of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā reconstructed by Manomohan Ghosh (1938: 1). It also occurs in the Agnipurāṇa version of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā as verse 3; verse 5 of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā presented by the commentary Pañjikā and Śikṣāprakāśa, the Yajus Recension, and the R̥k Recension. Manomohan Ghosh (1938: 50, 53)

162अध्याय १, पाद १ wrongly translates this as: “and the pluta l̥ is duḥspr̥ṣṭa.” The original verse is simply a continued listing the sounds included in the alphabet and includes the duḥspr̥ṣṭa sound as well as the prolonged l̥̄3 as belonging to the total listing. The term duḥspr̥ṣṭa refers to the retroflex ḷ (= ळ) found in the R̥gveda, and is not a description of the prolonged l̥̄3 as understood by Ghosh. १.१.४०. संध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्टवर्णान्येकवर्णवद्वृत्तिः । Whitney (1.40). Hb, Nb: °वृत्ति. G: 1.1.40. I: 40. O: °न्येवर्ण°. P: °संसृष्ट°. Translation: The composite-sounds [= e, o, ai, and au] have, [within each], fused [component] sounds, and [yet] they behave as single sounds. Note: Whitney and Allen (1953: 63) render the phrase एकवर्णवद् वृत्तिः by ‘they are treated as single letters.’ In my opinion, a better translation is offered by ‘they behave…’ The rule thus draws a distinction between the per- ceived phonetic nature and the phonological behavior. For instance, metrically these vowels form single syllables. It is clear from the plural form sandhyakṣarāṇi, that the text refers by this term to all four sounds, i.e. e, o, ai, and au, and not just to ai and au. As seen earlier, the ancient Śikṣā text cited in the CAB on CA (1.1.21, 25), seems to say that the sounds e and o have a single point of articulation, in contrast with ai and au, and that their monophthongal character seems to be supported by CA (1.1.34: एकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम्), the present rule clearly brings them under the term sandhyakṣara. The term sandhyakṣara is generally translated as ‘diphthong,’ and this raises the question of why the sounds e and o should come under this term. To begin with, we must disabuse ourselves of the notion that the term sandhyakṣara refers to a diphthong. It refers literally to a composite-sound, and the composite character is more in terms of their perceived origin, rather than in terms of their current articulation. Thus, phonetically the sounds e and o were monophthongs for the CA, and yet in terms of their origin they were seen as being born out of a combination. Allen (1953: 64) says: “It will be noted that even where the monophthongal value of e/o is phonetically estab- lished, the feeling for its phonological equivalence to a+i/u still prevails.” However, the combination of elements in e and o, as compared to the combination in ai and au, was perceived to be of a different nature by most

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका163 Sanskrit texts. The first pair represents a true fusion where the components can no longer be separately perceived, while the second pair has perceptible components. For the first type of combination, Patañjali uses the term praśliṣta, while for the second type of combination, he uses the term samāhāra, cf. MB (Kielhorn edn), Vol.I., p. 62: एवमप्यवर्णस्य एङोश्च सवर्णसंज्ञा प्राप्नोति । प्रश्लिष्टावर्णावेतौ । Also: इमावैचौ समाहारवर्णौ मात्रावर्णस्य मात्रेवर्णोवर्णयोः, MB (ibid), p. 78. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्टवर्णानि भवन्ति । एकवर्णवद् वृत्तिर्भवति । ए(?)एए३ ऐ(?)ऐऐ३ ओ(?) ओओ३ औ(?)औऔ३ । Note: It is not clear why the commentary offers three varieties of each diphthong. This is probably just an error under the influence of the triple listings for other vowels. भा.भा.वृत्ति - ए ऐ ओ औ सन्ध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्टवर्णानि वर्णद्वयजानि। एतेषामेकवर्णवद्वृत्तिः स्वभावो वर्तते । ‘गृ॒हे’ (अ.वे. १.१४.२)। ‘उ॒पैतु॑’ (अ.वे. ७.६६.१)। ‘अथो॑’ (अ.वे. १.१४.२)। ‘मि॒त्रा॒व॒रु॒णाै॒’ (अ.वे. १.२०. २)। किं च पदान्तसन्धौ सन्ध्यक्षराणि पदकाले पुनः प्रस्फुटन्ति । तत्रापि अवर्णान्तपदेन उञा योगे ओकारे जाते पदकालेऽपि नित्यसंहितत्वात् एकवद्वृत्तिरेव । ‘अथो॒ इति॑’ (अ.वे. १.१४.२) । ‘उ॒तो इति॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१६.३)। ‘सो इति॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.२०)। ‘उपो॒ इति’ (अ.वे. १३.४.४४, VVRI edn.: १३.७.१६)। १.१.४१. नैकारौकारयोः स्थानविधौ । Whitney (1.41). G: 1.1.41. E, F, O(orig): °यो स्था°. Translation: [The behavior of the sounds] ai and au [as single sounds] does not hold in the context of the prescription of their points of articulation (sthāna).

164अध्याय १, पाद १ Note: The listing of the four sounds in the commentaries is problem- atic. The rule clearly uses a dual form, and, after dissolving the sandhi in naikā- raukārayoḥ, it can be sensibly either ekāra+okārayoḥ, or aikāra+aukārayoḥ. Out of these two possibilities, Whitney opted for the second one, while Bhārgava-Bhāskara, and the CAB too, would like to have it both ways to include all the four sandhyakṣaras. The interpretation I have given above is supported by Whitney. On this rule, Whitney says: “What the meaning and value of the rule is is not alto- gether clear: I can see no other application of it than to forbid the inclusion of ai among the palatals only, and of au among the labials only, since they are both throat-sounds as well. By implication, then, e and o would admit of being ranked as merely palatal and labial.” This is in part because Whitney takes the word sthānavidhi to refer to ‘prescription of the point of articulation.’ The CAB as well as the ancient Śikṣā verse cited therein are unclear on this rule. Whitney derives the following meaning from the verse cited in the CAB: “perhaps the meaning is that, while the beginning and end of āi, for instance, are clearly a and i, a mora in the middle of the sound is of a mixed character.” The verse seems to refer to a half-mora element which is of mixed character. I think this is a plausible interpretation. On the other hand, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary seems to sup- port an interpretation like: “[The behavior] of the sounds e/ai and o/au [as single sounds, however], does not [hold] in the context of substitution [sthāna- vidhi , i.e. substitution of the constituents of these sounds by protracted varie- ties].” Bhārgava-Bhāskara draws our attention to the other possible meaning of the term sthānavidhi, i.e. substitution, cf. P.1.1.49 (षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा). With this other meaning of the word sthānavidhi, i.e. substitution, there is a different possible context for this rule. In the context of substitution, the sounds ai and au do not behave as single sounds, i.e. their different components receive dif- ferent substitutes. The best example to illustrate this different behavior of the components is offered in the Pāṇinian process of deriving the prolonged versions for e, o, ai, and au. Compare Pāṇini’s rules P. 8.2.105 (प्लुतावैच इदुतौ) and 8.2.106 (एचोप्रगृह्यस्यादूराद्धूते पूर्वस्यार्धस्यादुत्तरस्येदुतौ). The first rule says that when ai and au are prolonged, it is the i and the u elements of these composite sounds that get prolonged. Thus, a prolonged ai is equivalent to a+ī3, and a prolonged au is equivalent to a+ū3. The next rule says that, for a non-pragr̥hya e, o, ai, or au, except in a call from afar, the sound e and ai are prolonged to ā3+i, and o and au to ā3+u. Pāṇini’s rules clearly refer to the components in the context of substitution.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका165 In the examples khaṇvakhā3i and khaimakhā3i offered by Bhārgava- Bhāskara, we assume that an original e has been changed to ā3i, cf. Bhārgava- Bhāskara lists khaṇvakhe and khaimakhe as the non-pluta forms under CA (1.2.22). On the other hand, Whitney guesses on CA (1.4.5 = W 1.96) that the original non-pluta forms are ‘probably’ khaṇvakhāi and khaimakhāi. If Whitney is correct, we have the change of ai to ā3i. However, I agree with the Roth-Böhtlingk lexicon in considering these forms to be vocatives of the female frog-names khaṇvakhā and khaimakhā, and hence the non-pluta voca- tive forms are khaṇvakhe and khaimakhe, rather than khaṇvakhai and khai- makai. This is also supported by Sāyaṇa on ŚAV (4.15.15). Bhārgava- Bhāskara also offers an example of an original o changing to ā3u in the form vāyā3u (< vāyo). This example is not attested in the ŚAV. Of these two possible interpretations, the first one is the more likely interpretation, because the rule occurs in the context of describing the articula- tion of sounds, rather than in the context of substitution. The second argument which goes against the interpretation of Bhārgava-Bhāskara is that the so-called substitution for different parts of a diphthong in the context of pluta is never taught as a rule in the CA. It is simply taken for granted, because the pluta forms appear both in the Saṃhitāpāṭha and the Padapāṭha. Therefore, Bhārgava-Bhāskara was forced to bring in Pāṇini’s substitution rules, which clearly refer to components of the diphthongs. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऐकारौकारयोः स्थानविधाने एकवर्ण- वद् वृत्तिर्न भवति । एऐ३ ओऔ३ । ‘ऐकारौकारयोश्चापि पूर्वा मात्रा परा च या । अर्धमात्रा तयोर्मध्ये संस्पृ(सृ?)ष्ट इति न (नः?) स्मृतः ॥’ (Source?)। Note: The manuscript N has न in the last quarter of the verse, but the syntax of the verse still remains corrupt. भा.भा.वृत्ति - प्लुतसमये स्थानविधौ कर्तव्ये एकारस्य ओ- कारस्य च एकवर्णवद्वृत्तिर्न तिष्ठति । किं तर्हि । अकारः प्लुतः स्यात् । ततः परं क्रमात् ह्रस्वः इकारः उकारश्च प्रयु- ज्यते । ‘खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ मध्ये॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.१५)।

166अध्याय १, पाद १ ‘एहि वाया३उ संतिष्ठ’ (not in AV)। ‘इदं कल्पितं यज्ञ- पता३उ’ । तैत्तिरीये (तै.सं. ६.६.२)। ‘यज्ञपतौ’ इत्यौका- रस्यापि । ‘प्लुतावैच इदुतौ’ (पा. ८.२.१०६) इति पाणि- नीये चतुर्णां सन्ध्यक्षराणामुक्तम् । अत्र सूत्रे न एकारः न ऐ- कारः नैकारौकारयोः । अत्र ओकारः औकारः इति पद[च्]छेदेन चतुर्णां ग्रहणं ज्ञेयम् । Note: For the accentuation of the example from AV (4.15.15), see Note on CA (1.4.5). The VVRI Vedic concordance lists RV (9.96.12) as the only Saṃhitā occurrence for saṃ tiṣṭha, but the source for एहि वाया३उ सन्तिष्ठ is as yet unknown. There is no occurrence of saṃ tiṣṭha in the Brāhmaṇas and Āraṇyakas. इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । H, N: चतुराध्यायिकायां प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । ४१ । एकचत्वारिंशत् । E, F: प्रथमस्य प्रथमः पादः । A, B, D, M, P: प्रथमः पादः । J: इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । I: ४१ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । G: इत्यथर्ववेदांगकौत्सव्याकरणे प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमपादस्य भार्गवभास्करीयवृत्तिः परिपूर्णा । O: ॥१॥४१॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चतुराध्यायिकायां प्रथमस्याध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः। सूत्र ४१ । एकचत्वारिंशत् । भा.भा.वृत्ति - इत्यथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणे प्रथमाध्यायस्य प्रथमपादस्य भार्गवभास्करीयवृत्तिः परिपूर्णा । ______________________

॥ प्रथमोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ द्वितीयः पादः ॥ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अथ प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयपादस्थसूत्राणां वृत्तिरारभ्यते। तत्रादौ सन्ध्यप्रकरणे संज्ञा क्रियते वर्णानां ज्ञानाय । ॐ३म् । १.२.१. विसर्जनीयोऽभिनिष्टानः । Whitney (1.42), A, G, I, Hac, P: °ष्टानः । B, C, D, E, F, Hb, J, K, M, N, O: °ष्ठानः. G: 1.2.1. Translation: The ḥ (= visarjanīya) is an abhiniṣṭāna [‘off- glide’] sound. Note: The term abhiniṣṭāna is difficult to interpret, because it does not occur elsewhere in the grammatical literature, and because, in its few occur- rences in the Gr̥hya-Sūtras etc. it is simply used as a term referring to visarga;, for passages in the Gr̥hya-Sūtras, see: Āśvalāyana-Gr̥hya-Sūtra (1.15.4-5), Pāraskara-Gr̥hya-Sūtra (1.17.1-6), and Gobhila-Gr̥hya-Sūtra (2.8.14). For further references, see L. Renou (1942: 376). But the significance of the term itself is hardly accounted for. It looks like an older term for visarga or visarjanīya, which was discontinued in later Sanskrit. Secondly, the mss. are divided over the readings abhiniṣṭāna and abhi- niṣṭhāna. Pāṇini (8.3.86: अभिनिसस्तनः शब्दसंज्ञायाम्) derives the formation abhi- niṣṭāna from abhi+nis+!stan as a śabdasaṃjñā ‘technical term referring to a linguistic unit.’ However, the other reading is not without some justification. Whitney remarks on this rule: “Pāṇini’s rule must be taken as conclusive re- specting the derivation and form favored in his time, or by his school; but the analogy of the words abhinidhāna, abhinihita, abhinihata, abhinipāta cannot but suggest abhiniṣṭhāna as the true form, coming from the root sthā with the pre- fixes abhi and ni.” In my own opinion, the form abhiniṣṭāna is the original form, the lectio difficilior, and hence probably the original reading. What does the word abhiniṣṭāna mean? Whitney on this rule says: “The Böhtlingk-Roth lexicon gives it … the meaning ‘an expiring or vanishing

168अध्याय १, पाद २ sound (ein verklingender Laut),’ but this is merely a conjecture, and by no means so well supported by the etymology of the word (which would suggest rather ‘a sounding forth, a resonance’) as to be placed beyond the reach of question.” Recently, S.M. Katre (1987: 1039) seems to have followed the Böhtlingk-Roth interpretation in translating the term as ‘a phoneme that dies away.’ Such an interpretation makes no sense in view of the non-technical example offered in the KV on P.8.3.86: अभिनिस्तनति मृदङ्गः. Here it must refer to the reverberations of the sound of the drum. Therefore, I agree with Whitney’s interpretation. Perhaps, the best modern technical paraphrase would be ‘off-glide.’ The meaning of the term abhiniṣṭāna is probably close to that of visarga or visarjanīya, i.e. ‘to be released, emitted.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विसर्जनीयो वर्णः अभिनिष्टा(N: ष्ठा)- नो भवति । ‘अ॒क्तिः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘वृ॒क्षः’ (अ.वे. ४. ७.५)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - (विसर्जनीयोऽभिनिष्टानः) पृथक्पदे परे प्रत्ययोत्तरपदयोश्च विसर्जनीयः जिह्वामूलीयोपध्मानीयतां प्राप्तः अर्धविसर्गसदृशः विसर्गश्च यत्र साक्षात् दृश्यते सोऽभिनिष्टा- नसंज्ञो ज्ञेयः । परेण व्यञ्जनेन सह । पृथक्पदे । ‘कक्त क॑फो॒डौ’ (Whitney’s AV: क॑फौ॒डौ, अ.वे. १०.२.४)। ‘याक्त क्ल॒न्दाः’ (अ.वे. २.२.५)। ‘शं न॑क्त खनि॒त्रिमाः॒’ (अ.वे. १.६. ४)। ‘नी॒चैक्त ख॑न॒न्ति’ (अ.वे. २.३.३)। ‘ज॒ङ्गि॒डः(क्त?) प्र णः॒’ (अ.वे. २.४.६)। ‘स न॑क्त पि॒ता’ (अ.वे. २.१.३)। ‘परि॑ णक्त पातु’ (अ.वे. २.४.२)। ‘कक्त पृश्नि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ७. १०४.१)। ‘ब॒हु॒लाक्त फट् क॑रिक्रति’ (अ.वे. ४.१८.३)। ‘याक्त फ॒लिनीः॒’ (?)। आरण्यके (which one?)। ‘वन॒स्पत॑यः॒ शान्तिः॒’ (अ.वे. १९.९.१४)। ‘दैवीः॑ षडुर्वीः’ (अ.वे. ५.३. ६)। ‘आ॒न॒शा॒नाः स॑मा॒ने’ (अ.वे. २.१.५)। ‘नमः॒ क्षेत्र॑स्य॒ पत॑ये’ (अ.वे. २.८.५)। ‘शं नः॒ क्षेत्र॑स्य॒’ (अ.वे. १९.१०. १०)। ‘धे॒नवः॒

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका169 स्यन्द॑मानाः॒’ (अ.वे. २.५.६)। अन्तःपादम् । ‘अरुः॒स्त्राण॑म्’ (अ.वे. २.३.३)। प्रत्यये परे । ‘यशःसु’ (?)। ‘यशक्तकल्पम्’ (?)। ‘वेधक्तपाशः’ (?)। ‘अभिनिस-स्तनः शब्दसंज्ञायाम्’ (पा. ८.३.८६) इति पाणिनीये व्यु-त्पादितः । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara gives a somewhat different interpretation of the term abhiniṣṭāna. According to him, it does not refer just to a normal visarga (i.e. ḥ), but to visarga as it changes to ḫ (= jihvāmūlīya) before k, kh, or to ẖ (= upadhmānīya) before p, ph. Such changes may be due to external or internal sandhi. We have no way of evaluating Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s inter- pretation, except to say that it does not agree with the general usage of the term abhiniṣṭāna in the Gr̥hya-Sūtras, where it seems to be a plain and simple equivalent of the generic visarga. The CAB also seems to interpret this term as a generic equivalent of visarga, and the examples it cites are of word-final visarga before pause. Therefore, the chances of Bhārgava-Bhāskara being cor- rect are slim. The example याः फलिनीः is found in RV (10.97.15), TS (4.2.6.4), and VS (12.89). It is also found in the Mantra-Brāhmaṇa (1.5.1), edited by Satyavrat Sāmaśramī, Calcutta, 1947. It is not traced to any known Āraṇyaka. However, Bhārgava-Bhāskara cites it as an Āraṇyaka example. The example यशस्कल्पम् is found in the KV (on P.8.3.38: सोऽपदादौ). For the textual variation concerning the example कः कफोडौ from AV (10.2.4) and its interpretation, see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 568). १.२.२. व्यञ्जनविधारणमभिनिधानः । Whitney (1.43), C, E, H, I, N, P: single Sūtra: व्यञ्जनविधारणमभिनिधानः पीडितः सन्नतरो हीनश्वासनादः । A, B, D: two Sūtras: व्यंजनविधारणमभिनिधानः पीडितः। संन(त in D)तरो हीनश्वासनादः । F, G, J, K, M: the first of the two Sūtras ends with °धानः । G numbers the two Sūtras: 1.2.2, 1.2.3. Translation: Holding a consonant back [i.e. not releasing it, or checking it] is termed abhinidhāna. Note: Following Whitney, Varma (1929: 137) and Allen (1953: 71- 72) take CA (1.2.2-3) as representing a single rule. The manuscripts are split half and half on this issue. Among the commentaries, the CAB takes the entire

170अध्याय १, पाद २ stretch (CA 1.2.2-3) as being a single rule, a definition or description of abhi- nidhāna. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary, on the other hand takes these two to be separate rules. The first rule is a definition of abhinidhāna, while the second one a definition of the term sannatara. I have given these as two rules, because mss. from different groups seem to treat these as two rules. The manuscript G numbers these two rules separately, and with this numbering, the CA 1.2.10 appears as 1.2.10 in both I and G. On the other hand, I do not agree with Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s notion that rule 1.2.3 defines a separate term, i.e. sannatara. I think rule 1.2.3 is simply a supplement to 1.2.2, and, hence is a further description of abhinidhāna. Whitney uses the terms implosion and explosion to refer to the two phases involved in the pronunciation of consonants. The first step, especially clear in the case of stops, is indicated by the formation of contact between the articulator and the point of articulation. The sound becomes more audible with the release of that contact, referred to by Whitney by the term explosion. When a stop is followed by another stop, or by a pause, then the utterance of the first stop basically ends with the first phase, and there does not follow a clear release of the contact, making the consonant weakly audible. Whitney gener- ally treats this as a description of indistinct pronunciation. He saw many diffi- culties in this description, and explained those difficulties “by supposing that the Hindus had not made a complete physical analysis of the phonomenon, and hence that their descriptions of it partake of vagueness and inconsistency; and also, that they have brought together under the name abhinidhāna things not entirely accordant, although analogous, in character.” Since Whitney was unhappy with the first explanation of the notion of incomplete utterance, he came up with a second hypothesis (p. 36): “An alter- native view to which I have myself been somewhat attracted is that by the abhinidhāna is meant the instant of silence which intervenes between the clo- sure of the organs for the first mute, and their opening for the second: that the Hindu theory regards, in the word āpta, for example, the utterance of the p as complete by the closure of the lips upon the preceding ā, and that of the t as complete by the unclosure of the tongue before the following a, while the brief interval of suspended utterance separating the two acts is abhinidhāna.” A few modern scholars have taken this to represent Whitney’s final view, cf. Vijay Shankar Pandeya (1987: 183). It is, however, not clear whether Whitney’s statements concerning the ‘Indian notions of the complete utterance of a stop’ are correct. On the other hand, Whitney finally arrives at the following under- standing (p. 36): “Fatal objections, however, to this explanation are: the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका171 treatment of the phenomenon as something affecting the former consonant, not interposed after it; the difficulty of assuming any such interval of silence in the case of a concurrence with sonant and nasal mutes; and the non-applicability of the theory to the case of a final consonant. The term vyañjanavidhāraṇa must therefore be understood as used simply in antithesis to the saṃyuktam of rule 49 (= CA 1.2.9: अतोऽन्यत् संयुक्तम्): whereas, in other cases of concurrence of consonants, there is actual combination, with partial assimilation of the latter to the former (rule 50 = CA 1.2.10), here each is held apart from the other as distinct.” Whitney realizes that this explanation may not be applicable to the word-final consonants, but states that “it is allowable to regard as contemplated in a general description or designation of a phonetic phenomenon its principal case only.” Allen (1953: 70ff.) comes up with a more positive understanding of this phenomenon. More than an interval of silence, the term abhinidhāna refers to an unreleased consonant, either before another consonant making the con- junction weak and excludable from the notion of saṃyukta ‘conjunct conso- nants,’ or occurring at the word-final position, making the consonant midway between a voiced or a voiceless consonant, as debated in CA (1.1.10: प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः). Allen (1953: 71) describes abhinidhāna as: “the non-release of a consonant, more particularly a stop, when followed by a stop, and parallels the French term ‘implosion.’” The notion of ‘implosion’ makes eminent sense in the case of a stop followed by a stop, particularly when we see deaspiration of the first stop, aspiration being a feature of the release or ‘explosion.’ However, the term abhinidhāna seems to refer to overall weakening of the initial consonant of a consonant-cluster, and of the final consonant before pause. This overall weakening makes such consonants subject to changes of all kinds, especially subject to progressive assimilation in sandhis and loss of final consonants in Prakrits. Allen (1953: 70ff) correctly links this non-release of the consonant with both the contexts, i.e. a not-too-tight consonantal contact as well as the word-final position. It must be noted that the notion of abhinidhāna, its nature, and scope, were a highly disputed topic among the various traditions, and the phenomenon probably also varied dialectally, cf. Varma (1929: 133-147). For another recent discussion of this term, also see: Ralf Stautzebach (1994: 312-313). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यञ्जनविधारणमभिनिधानो भवति । पीडितश्च श्वासनादाभ्याम् । अपर आह । व्यञ्जनविधारणम- भिनिपातो(ऽ?)मात्रो जपनो भवति पीडितश्च श्वास-

172अध्याय १, पाद २ नादाभ्याम् । अपर आह । व्यञ्जनविधारणमभिनिपा- तो(ऽ?)मात्रो जपने गुरुता भवति । अन्तःपदे पदान्ते वा पीडितः सन्न एव तु । अवकृष्टतर(ः?)स्थानादवसन्नतरश्च सः । हीनश्च श्वासनादाभ्यां यो यत्रार्थे(H: र्थो)ऽभिधीयते । (source?) भा.भा.वृत्ति - यो विसर्गः व्यञ्जनरूपं धारयति तस्य परेण व्यञ्जनेन सह योगे द्वयोरभिनिधानसंज्ञा । संयोगसंज्ञाया अवान्तरभेदः । विसर्गस्य रेफशषसा भवन्ति । रेफः । बहिः। ‘ब॒हिर्बालिति॑’ (अ.वे. १.३.६)। ‘स्वर्ण’ (अ.वे. २.५.२, not ṇ, but n in Whitney’s AV)। ‘स्व॒र्षाम्’ (अ.वे. २०.३५. ३)। ‘स्वर्पतीन्’ (स्व॑र्पति॒म्, अ.वे. २०.५४.२)। ‘चतु॒र्भ्यः’ (अ.वे. १.१२.४)। ‘धू॒र्षु’ । ऋग्वेदे (ऋ.वे. १.१००. १६)। ‘आ॒भि॒र॒प्स॒रासु’ (अ.वे. २.२.३)। ‘आ॒हु॒र्यतः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२.३)। ‘दु॒रि॒ता’ (अ.वे. २.६.५)। शत्वम् । ‘श॒णश्च॑ मा जङ्गि॒डश्च’ (अ.वे. २.४.५)। ‘यश्च॒कार॒’ (अ.वे. २.९.५)। ‘मधो॑श्चका॒नः’ (अ.वे. २.५.१)। ‘प्र॒दिश॒श्चत॑स्रः’ (अ.वे. २. ६.१)। ‘म॑न्यु॒तश्शपा॒त्’ (अ.वे. २.७.२)। षत्वम् । ‘द्यौक्ता॑’ (अ.वे. २.२८.४)। ‘अ॒क्तिष्टे॑’ (अ.वे. ७.४३.२)। ‘वा॒यु- ष्टान्’ (अ.वे. २.३४.४)। ‘अ॒क्तिष्टत्’ (अ.वे. ७.४३.३)। सत्वम् । ‘क्ल॒न्दास्तमि॑षीचयः॒’ (अ.वे. २.२.५)। ‘इन्द्र॑स्तुरा॒- षाट्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। ‘अञ्ज॑स्समु॒द्रम्’ (अ.वे. २.५.६)। उपचारोऽप्यत्रैव । ‘अ॒ध॒स्प॒दम्’ (अ.वे. २.७.२)। ‘निष्क॑र॒त्’ (अ.वे. २.९.५)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara takes abhinidhāna as a continued descrip- tion of the visarga and its contextual substitutes. For him, when a visarga, or

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका173 its contextual substitute, combines with the following consonant, both the con- sonants together are called abhinidhāna. This interpretation cannot be correct. १.२.३. पीडितः सन्नतरो हीनश्वासनादः । Whitney (1.43) combines with the previous Sūtra. Translation: [The sound termed abhinidhāna in the previous rule is] squeezed, weaker, and has reduced breath or voice. Note: As explained in the Note on the earlier rule, I have treated this as a separate rule, and yet I think it is a continuation of the previous descrip- tion. The term vyañjanavidhāraṇam, in the previous rule, referring to “holding apart or back” of a consonant, seems like a description of the consequences of a certain phonetic process, and that process is described more fully in the present rule. The three terms contained in this rule describe different di- mensions of this articulatory process. The term pīḍita, lit. ‘pressed,’ seems to refer to the non-release of the contact between the articulator and the point of articulation. The term hīnaśvāsanāda refers to weak emission involved, whether the consonant be voiced or voiceless. The term sannatara presents some further difficulties. It is translated by Whitney (p. 34) as ‘quite weakened,’ and Varma (1929: 137) and Allen (1953: 72) generally follow Whitney. The term avasannatara appears in the Śikṣā verse cited in the Caturādhyāyībhāṣya on the previous rule. Elsewhere, i.e. P.1.2.40 (उदात्तस्वरितपरस्य सन्नतरः), the term sannatara is used to describe the lowest pitch level, lower than the normal low-pitch (anudātta). This is for a low-pitch syllable which precedes an udātta ‘high-pitch’ or a svarita ‘rising- falling’ syllable. Thus, sanna in this context refers to low-pitch, and sannatara refers to a pitch lower than the normal low-pitch. It is not clear if there is any shared value in the use of the same term in these two different contexts. Per- haps, the term implies in a generic manner the low level of effort involved in both the lowest-pitch vowels, and the unreleased stops, and in this sense may be comparable to the term laghu-prayatna-tara. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - See the commentary on the previous rule. भा.भा.वृत्ति - द्वयोर्वर्णयो[ः] स्वरव्यञ्जनयोः स्वरयोर्वा मध्ये पीडितः । हीनश्वासनादः सन् नश्यति विकृतो वा भवति स

174अध्याय १, पाद २ सन्नतरसंज्ञो ज्ञेयः । अः । अक्तक । अक्तप । श । ष । स । एते श्वासप्रयक्तकाः । य । र। एतौ नादप्रयक्तकौ । एतद्रूपै- र्हीनो विसर्गः इत्यर्थः । अर्थात् उत्वं प्राप्तो वा । लुप्तः कृत- दीर्घो वा । लुप्तो वा । सन्नतरः । अदृष्ट इत्यर्थः। उत्वे ओत्वं प्राप्तः । ‘अ॒न्यो रसे॑भ्यः’ (अ.वे. २.४.५)। ‘म॒यो॒- भुवः॒’ (अ.वे. १.५.१)। ‘च॒तुर्भ्यो॒ अङ्गे॑भ्यः॒’ (अ.वे. १.१२. ४)। ‘शं नो॑ दे॒वीः’ (अ.वे. १.६.१)। ‘न॑म॒स्यो॑ वि॒क्षु’ (अ.वे. २.२.१)। लुप्तः कृतदीर्घः । ‘प्रा॒ता रात्री॑’ (अ.वे. ६. १२८.२)। ‘सार॑थी रे॒ष्मा’ (अ.वे. १५.२.१)। ‘ज॒घ्नू रक्ष॑ां- सि’ (अ.वे. ४.३७.१)। लुप्तः । ‘स ए॒व’ (अ.वे. २.९.५)। ‘ए॒ष पू॒र्तम्’ (अ.वे. ९.६.३१, VVRI edn.: ९.८.१)। ‘ए॒ष स्य ते॑’ (अ.वे. २०.६७.६)। ‘स इत्’ (अ.वे. १४.१. २९)। ‘प्र॑थम॒ज ऋ॒तस्य॒’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१६)। ‘वा॒श्रा इ॑व’ (अ.वे. २.५.६)। ‘या॒तु॒धाना॑ अ॒त्रिणः॒’ (अ.वे. १.७.३)। ‘ग॒न्ध॒र्व अा॑सीत्’ (अ.वे. २.२.३)। ‘विश्वा॑ आदित्य’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२८)। ‘क ईं वेद’ (अ. वे. २०.५३.१)। ‘एक॑ ए॒व’ (अ.वे. २.१.३)। ‘दे॒वा अ॒मृत॑म्’ (अ.वे. २.१.५)। ‘सु॒तास॑ इन्द्र’ (अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘उ॒प॒जीका॒ उत्’ (अ.वे. २.३.४)। ‘नम॒ इत्’ (अ.वे. २.२.४)। ‘आ॒प ओष॑धयः’ (अ.वे. २.३. ६)। ‘ब्रा॒ह्म॒णा इ॒मे’ (अ.वे. २.६.३)। ‘नम॑ ईषायु॒गेभ्यः॑’ (अ.वे. २.८.४)। ‘ब्र॒ह्माण॑ उ॒त’ (अ.वे. २.९.४)। व्यञ्जने परे । ‘या वि॒श्वाव॑सुम्’ (अ.वे. २.२.४)। ‘अ॒क्षका॑मा मनो॒- मुहः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२.५)। ‘इ॒मा या दे॒वीः’ (अ.वे. २.१०. ४)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara takes this rule to be a definition of the term sannatara which he claims applies to a visarga which changes in certain sandhis in such a way that it survives neither as a sibilant, nor as a y or an r. It is doubtful if the rule has any such meaning. The term hīna-śvāsa-nāda is taken

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका175 by Bhārgava-Bhāskara to mean a sound which has neither śvāsa nor nāda. This is clearly unacceptable. १.२.४. स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शेऽभिनिधानः । Whitney (1.44). G: 1.2.4. O: °मिधानः. Translation: Before a stop [lit. ‘contact consonant,’ includ- ing the nasals ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, and m], there is abhinidhāna [i.e. lack of release] of a stop. Note: The CA unconditionally refers to all stops, including nasals, in this rule. This includes conjuncts of homorganic as well as non-homorganic stops, and it also includes combinations of nasals and non-nasals. One of the interpretations proposed for abhinidhāna by Whitney was a moment of silence between the consonants. However, as Whitney himself recognized, such a moment of silence does not seem possible between, for example, a voiced un- aspirated stop and a homorganic nasal, because the transition between such sounds is far smoother. Therefore, the best conception of abhinidhāna is represented by ‘unreleased’ articulation. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शे परतः अभिनिधानो भवति । ‘बृहद्भिः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १०.९.७)। ‘स॒मिद्भिः॑’ (ऋ.वे. ३.१.२)। ‘म॒रुद्भिः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२९.४)। Note: As Whitney notes, out of the three examples cited by the CAB, only the last example is found in the (Ś)AV. The form samidbhiḥ is not found in AV, and the references listed for this word in Vishva Bandhu’s A Gram- matical Word-Index to Atharvaveda (p. 622) are actually references for the word samidhaḥ, wrongly ascribed to samidbhiḥ. One may also note that Surya Kanta has not made the expected suggestion that the first two forms cited by the CAB, which are not found in the Vulgate of the AV, probably occurred in the real Śaunakīya recension of the AV which is now lost and that the Vulgate does not represent the true Śaunakīya recension.

176अध्याय १, पाद २ भा.भा.वृत्ति - कादयो मावसानाः पञ्चविंशतिः स्पर्शाः । स्पर्शयोर्योगः अभिनिधानसंज्ञः । ‘मु॒मु॒ग्धि॒’ (अ.वे. ६.१११. १)। Note: According to Bhārgava-Bhāskara, the whole cluster of stops gets the designation abhinidhāna. This does not seem to be correct. The phrase स्पर्शस्य … अभिनिधानः is comparable to substitution or alteration, in the classical Pāṇinian fashion, where the genitive case represents the sthānin ‘item undergoing substitution, item being replaced,’ and the item in the nominative represents the ādeśa ‘substitute,’ cf. P.1.1.49 (षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा). १.२.५. पदान्तावग्रहयोश्च । Whitney (1.45). G: 1.2.5. Translation: Also at the end of a word [before pause in the Padapāṭha] and [at the end of the first member of a compound, or at the end of a nominal base] in separation [of the members of a compound or of the base from the case-ending in the Padapāṭha, a stop is reduced to abhinidhāna]. Note: Heffner (1952: 119): “The contact and hold phases are usually easy to observe, the release may be obscured, notably for instance, when the stop is the final element of the breath group. In the phrase, and then he went to sleep, the final [p] of sleep is often not released by the labial “explosion," but by the lowering of the velum for the resumption of normal breathing, the lips having simply remained closed. Such a release is usually not audible.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्ते अवग्रहे च स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शे परतः अभिनिधानो भवति । ‘तान् । वः॒ । यः । दे॒वाना॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.५)। ‘अ॒प्ऽसु’ (पद, अ.वे. १.६.२)। ‘सा॒ला॒- वृ॒कान्ऽइ॑व’ (पद, अ.वे. २.२७.५)। ‘खल्वा॑न्ऽइव’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३१.१)। Note: Whitney correctly points out that the phrase स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शे परतः “has no business here: that case is included in the preceding rule, and the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका177 present precept applies to the pronunciation of a final as a final, without any reference to what may follow.” In all the cases cited by the commentator, the word-final stop is followed by a pause, rather than by another stop. भा.भा.वृत्ति - पदान्तग्रहणात् पूर्वसूत्रमपा(प?)दान्तार्थं ज्ञेयम् । पदान्तस्पर्शस्य पदादिस्पर्शे परे उभयोः स्पर्शयोर्योगः अभिनिधानसंज्ञः । किं च। अवगृह्यपदे स्पर्शयोः सन्धौ सैव संज्ञा । पदान्तग्रहणेनावग्रहस्यान्तःपातित्वात् । अवग्रहशब्देन निषिद्धावग्रहपदानि संज्ञादिषूक्तानि । तत्र पदान्तसन्धौ भव- त्वेतदर्थं पृथग्ग्रहणम् । पदान्तसन्धि । अवगृह्यपदम् । ‘दम्ऽप॑ती’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३.१४)। ‘स॒म्ऽगम॑नम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.४९)। ‘घ॒र्म॒सत्ऽभिः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३. ४७)। निषिद्धावग्रहम् । ‘हिरण्मयम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ७.५.८)। ‘म॒रुतः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२९.५)। ‘अ॒ध॒रात्ता॑त्’ (ऋ.वे. १०. ३६.१४, not in AV, but found in the late text Gaṇeśa- Atharvaśīrṣa)। ‘इ॒त्थम्’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.७)। स्पर्शयोः किम् । ‘उ॒त्ऽश्वञ्च॑माना’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.५१)। ‘उत् । श्व॒ञ्च॒-स्व॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.५०)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara also brings the words sparśasya sparśe pare into this rule and says that this rule applies to a stop which occurs at the end of a word and is followed by the initial stop the next word. With this in- terpretation, he says that the previous rule applies to stops in non-final position. For Bhārgava-Bhāskara to be correct, one must assume that one is dealing with external sandhi applications, and not with what happens to the word-final stop in the Padapāṭha before pause. In that case, the rule would be dealing with two entirely unrelated situations, one a situation of a word-final stop followed by a word-initial stop, and the second a situation where the word-final stop is followed by an avagraha, a mini-pause to mark the separa- tion of the members of a compound in the Padapāṭha. This seems to be a very unlikely combination. The best way is to take this rule to apply to the word- final stops before pause in the Padapāṭha.

178अध्याय १, पाद २ Another feature of Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s interpretation is that he views the term abhinidhāna as applying to both the stops involved in a conjunct. This does not seem to be correct. It is interesting to note that all the instances of the word hiraṇmaya- listed in Vishva Bandhu’s Grammatical Word-Index to the Atharvaveda (p. 678) are from the Paippalāda Atharvaveda. However, it should be noted that the word hiraṇmaya as a variant for hiraṇyaya does occur in the mss. of the ŚAV. See the variants given for hiraṇyayīm in AV (10.2.33) in the VVRI edition. १.२.६. लकारस्योष्मसु । Whitney (1.46). G: 1.2.6. Translation: The consonant l [is reduced to abhinidhāna] before spirants. Note: Whitney notes that “only spirants before which l is found actu- ally to occur in the Atharvaveda are ś and h.” Whitney has discussed the de- tails of how this notion is highly eclectic and that other treatises propose differ- ent treatments for l under similar circumstances. His own response to this prescription, however, is: “I must confess myself unable to explain why either l before a spirant, or the nasals before h, as taught in the next rule, should suf- fer or be regarded as suffering the obscuring process of abhinidhāna.” As far as the case of the abhinidhāna taught by the present rule is concerned, Varma (1929: 147) says: “This probably refers to a sporadic phenomenon in some of the dialects, for in the majority of cases we should expect Svarabhakti after l or r before fricatives. The fact that this sporadic phenomenon actually existed in some dialects is corroborated by Prākrit vassa-, side by side with, in the major- ity of cases, varisa-, valiśa-.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - लकारस्य ऊष्मसु परतः । अभिनि- धानो भवति । ‘श॒तब॑ल्शा॒ वि रो॑ह’ (अ.वे. ६.३०.२)। ‘स ग॑मिष्यति॒ बल्ि॑हकान्’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.९)। ‘वि॒हल्हो॒ नाम॑’ (अ.वे. ६.१६.२)। Note: Referring to the expression balhikān cited as an example of this rule, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 260) says: “The Prāt. rule i.46 (= CA

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका179 1.2.6) applies, if we may trust the comment, to the name in d (in AV 5.22.5) and proves it to be bálhika, and not báhlika; the mss. vary between the two, the majority giving -lh-; but the testimony of no ms. is of any authority on this particular point; Ppp. appears to have -hl-.” The APR (175: गल्हे विल्हौ हकारान्तः संयोगः) supports the CA rule. Witzel informs (in personal communication) that the Orissa mss regularly have -lih-, -liś- etc. The last two examples cited by the CAB are also found, though in reverse order, in APR (175). Contrast balśā of the CAB and the valśā of Bhārgava-Bhāskara. भा.भा.वृत्ति - शषसहा ऊष्माणः । एषु परेषु लकारस्य योगे द्वयोर्व्यञ्जनयोः योगस्य अभिनिधानसंज्ञा । ‘श॒तव॑ल्शा॒’ (अ.वे. ६.३०.२)। ‘स॒हस्र॑वल्शा’ तैत्तिरे (तै.सं. १.१.२. १)। ‘बल्हि॑केषु’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.५)। ‘म॒ल्हाम्’ तैत्तिरे (तै.सं. १.८.१९.१) । ऊष्मसु इति किम् । ‘स॒ङ्क॒ल्पकु॑ल्म- लाम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२५.२)। अत्र लद्वयस्य स्पर्शसंयोगः । ‘ति॒- ल्पिञ्ज॒म्’ (अ.वे. १२.२.५४)। ‘शु॒ल्कम्’ (अ.वे. ५.१९. ३)। ‘अ॒लाण्डू॒न्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.२)। ‘गल्दा’ ऋग्वेदे (‘ग- ल्द॑या,’ ऋ.वे. ८.१.२०)। ‘गु॒ल्फौ’ (अ.वे. १०.२.१)। ‘उल्बः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२.८)। ‘प्र॒ग॒ल्भः’ तैत्तिरीये (तै.सं. २. ५.५.३)। ‘श॒ल्यः’ (अ.वे. २.३०.३)। ‘त॑ङ्ग॒ल्वा॒[]त्’ (अ.वे. ८.६.२१)। Note: Half of Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary is occupied in giv- ing examples of the combinations of l with non-spirants, where he says the abhinidhāna does not occur. The examples show his familiarity with the R̥gveda, and the Taittirīya school of the Kr̥ṣṇa Yajurveda. It is, however, not clear why the example alāṇḍūn is offered. Here, we have an instance of l fol- lowed by a vowel. १.२.७. ङणनानां हकारे । Whitney (1.47). G: 1.2.7. Translation: The sounds ṅ, ṇ, and n [are reduced to abhini- dhāna] before h.

180अध्याय १, पाद २ Note: Whitney on the previous rule expresses his inability to explain why the change prescribed by the present rule should occur, and for some reason, Varma’s (1929) extensive discussion of abhinidhāna does not cover the cases which come under the present rule. The only real examples from the AV are those of ṅ and n being followed by h. This occurs only for word-final ṅ and n before word-initial h, in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. In the Padapāṭha, the word- final ṅ and n would be followed by a pause, and hence would be reduced to abhinidhāna by CA (1.2.5). These sequences do not occur word-internally. The example with sugaṇ offered in the commentaries is an artificial example. It is, then, not entirely clear why ṇ was included in this rule. Fabricated examples with gaṇ or sugaṇ are found in the CAB on CA (2.1.9) and (3.2.2), and also in the Śikṣā verse cited in the CAB on CA (3.2.2). The late commentators in the Pāṇinian tradition also resort to sugaṇ, cf. Siddhāntakaumudī on P.8.3.32 (ङमो ह्रस्वादचि ङमुण्नित्यम्). One may note that the KV on the same rule comes up with an example with an artificial vaṇ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ङणनानां हकारे परतः अभिनिधानो भवति । ‘प्र॒त्यङ् हि’ (अ.वे. ४.१९.७)। ‘गण् हि’ (not in AV)। ‘क्रिमी॑न् हन्तु’ (अ.वे. २.३२.१)। ‘अ॒मून् हे॒तिः’ (अ.वे. ६.२९.१)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - ङणनानां हकारे परे द्वयोर्योगे अभिनिधान- संज्ञा । ‘प्रत्यङ् ह’ (not in AV)। ‘सुगण् हरः’ (not in AV)। ‘हि॒न्व॒न् हर॑यः॒’ (अ.वे. २०.३१.२)। १.२.८. आस्थापितं च । Whitney (1.48). G: 1.2.8. Translation: [The abhinidhāna is] also called āsthāpita [‘arrested’]. Note: The CAB seems to say that āsthāpita is simply another name for the abhinidhāna. Whitney has followed the CAB in interpreting āsthāpita as just another name for the abhinidhāna. He says that this alternative title “does not notably help our comprehension of it (= abhinidhāna): the word admits of being translated, in accordance with the explanation of abhinidhāna offered

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका181 above, ‘made to stand up to, or against;’ but it may also be rendered ‘stopped,’ that is, ‘silenced,’ and so may favor another theory of the phenomenon.” Allen (1953: 72) follows Whitney, except that he translates the term āsthāpita as ‘arrested,’ and takes it to be just another name for abhinidhāna. RPR (4.1) uses the term āsthāpita to refer to consonant+consonant sandhi. It is therefore likely that the terms āsthāpita and abhinidhāna would have a largely overlapping area of application. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आस्थापितसंज्ञश्च भवति । अभिनिधा- नश्च । एतान्येवोदाहरणानि । भा.भा.वृत्ति - आ मध्ये स्थाप्यते स्म तत् आस्थापितम् । आगम इत्यर्थः । स आगमः पूर्वोत्तरव्यञ्जनेन सह अभिनि- धानसंज्ञः स्यात् । ‘बट्त्सू॑र्य॒’ (अ.वे. २०.४८.४) । ‘ता- न्त्स॑वितः’ (W: तां सवितः, अ. वे. ७.१५.१) । ‘प्र॒त्यङ्ङु- दे॑षि॒’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२०) । ‘आ॒व॒र्त्स्यन्न॑मन्यत’ (अ.वे. १५. ६.७)। ‘सर्वा॑ञ्च्छ॒लुना॒न्’ (W: सर्वां, अ.वे. २.३१.२)। ‘इ॒च्छन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. २०.१८.३)। Note: Quite a different interpretation for the rule is proposed by Bhārgava-Bhāskara in his commentary. He takes the term āsthāpita as being equivalent to āgama ‘augment, appended item,’ in the Pāṇinian tradition. According to his explanation, the consonantal augments inserted between either two consonants, or between a consonant and a vowel, are referred to by the term āsthāpita. According to him, such a consonantal augment, along with the preceding and the following consonant is given the name abhinidhāna. For instance, in an example like tān+savitaḥ, by following CA (2.1.9: ङणनानां कटतैः शषसेषु), a euphonic t is inserted between the final n and the initial s, giving us tān-t-savitaḥ. According to the interpretation suggested by Bhārgava-Bhāskara, this euphonic t would be reduced to an abhinidhāna, i.e. ‘an unreleased stop.’ The dialectal instability of such augments is indicated by the fact that these are made optional in Pāṇini (8.3.28-31). The abhinidhāna character of such a sound would indeed manifest in such instability. However, we do not have any way to confirm independently that the term āsthāpita was used to refer to such ‘augments.’

182अध्याय १, पाद २ The examples प्र॒त्यङ्ङुदे॑षि॒ and आ॒व॒र्त्स्यन्न॑मन्यत need to be distinguished from other examples. Here, the augments ṅ and n are immediately preceded by ṅ and n, but are followed by vowels. It may also be noted that the manuscripts of the AV do not exhibit these readings with the added augments. १.२.९. अतोऽन्यत्संयुक्तम् । Whitney (1.49). G: 1.2.9. A, B, D: °त्प° for °न्य°. Translation: [A consonant, involved in a consonant+conso- nant combination], other than these [i.e. listed under the cate- gory of abhinidhāna], is called saṃyukta ‘conjunct.’ Note: It should be noted that the scope of the notion of saṃyoga is different from that of the term saṃyukta, though both of these terms are ety- mologically related. The term saṃyoga as used in CA (1.2.11: ह्रस्वं लघ्वसंयोगे) and CA (1.4.7: व्यञ्जनान्यव्यवेतानि स्वरैः संयोगः) encompasses all consonant+ consonant combinations, including those covered under abhinidhāna. On the other hand, the term saṃyukta excludes the cases of abhinidhāna. It would seem that the distinction between abhinidhāna and saṃyukta was phonetically relevant, but not grammatically. Probably for this reason, Pāṇini used only the broad notion of saṃyoga, cf. P.1.1.7 (हलोऽनन्तराः संयोगः), and dispensed with the distinction between abhinidhāna and saṃyukta. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अतोऽन्ये व्यञ्जनसंधयः संयुक्ता भवन्ति । अन्ये अभिनिधानात् पदान्तात् स्पर्शाः (Whitney’s emendation: पदान्तस्पर्शाः)। अन्तस्थोष्मसु पदा(भि?)दिषु च संयुज्यन्ते । ‘गोधुग्याति’ । ‘विराड्याति’ । ‘दृषद्याति’ । ‘त्रिष्टुब्याति’ । ‘गोधुग्वयति’ । ‘विराड्वयति’ । ‘त्रिष्टु- ब्वयति’ । ‘गोधुग्रथे’ । ‘विराड्रथे’ । ‘षड्रथे’ । ‘गोधुक्शेते’। ‘विराज्(ट्?)शेते(?)’। ‘दृषत्(?)शेते’ । ‘त्रिष्टुप्शेते’ । ‘गोधुक्षण्डे’ । ‘विराड्(ट्?)षण्डे’ । ‘दृषत्षण्डे’ । ‘त्रिष्टु- प्षण्डे’ । ‘गोधुक्साये’ । ‘विराड्(ट्?)साये’। ‘दृषत्साये’ । ‘त्रिष्टुप्साये’ ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका183 Note: Both the manuscripts write त्रि as तृ or नृ. All the examples cited by the CAB are artificial examples produced by combinations and per- mutations of a few words. It is again interesting to note that Surya Kanta does not claim these as belonging to the so-called lost recension of the genuine Śaunakīya AV. Surya Kanta’s overall argument is weakened by the obvious existence of such a large number of non-AV examples in this commentary. Examples with śete, sāye, and ṣaṇḍe are found in the KV on P.8.3.28, 29, 30, and 36. These examples are not textual quotations, but possible usages. The wording of the CAB, i.e. अन्ये अभिनिधानात् पदान्तात्, creates an im- pression that the term saṃyoga applies to cases of contact between a final and an initial, but, as Whitney correctly notes, such is not the case. भा.भा.वृत्ति - अभिनिष्टानाभिनिधानसन्नतरसंज्ञाभ्योऽन्यत् व्यञ्जनयोर्योगः अनुस्वारव्यञ्जनयोगश्च संयुक्तसंज्ञो ज्ञेयः । कः सः । स्पर्शान्तस्थसंयोगः । लकारस्य स्पर्शान्तस्थसंयोगः । ङणनानां हसंयोगवर्जम् । ‘स॒त्यम्’ (अ.वे. २.१५.५)। ‘सं॒व॒त्स॒रः’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.८)। ‘अ॒रा॒य्यः॑’ (अ.वे. १.२८. ४)। ‘वा॒य॒व्या॑न्’ (अ.वे. १९.६.१४)। ‘आ॒चा॒र्यः॑’ (११.५. ३)। ‘श॒ल्यम्’ (अ.वे. ७.१०७.१, VVRI edn.: ७.११२. १)। ‘आश्यम्’ (?)। ‘हविष्यम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १.८९.३, no occurrence in ŚAV)। ‘स॒स्यम्’ (अ.वे. ७.११.१, VVRI edn.: ७.१२.१)। ‘गृह्य॑[ाः]’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.४)। ‘व(वा?)- य्वोः’ (not in AV)। ‘सर्वः॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘त॑ङ्ग॒ल्वा॒- []त्’

(अ.वे.

८.६.२१)। ‘अश्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३०.५)। ‘दु॒[ष्]-ष्वप्न्य॒[म्]’ (अ.वे. ६.४६.३)। ‘स्वः’ (अ.वे. १.१९.३)। ‘अ॒ह्वे॒’ (अ.वे. ४.२७.१)। ‘सुव्रतम्’ (‘सु॒व्र॒ताना॑म्,’ अ.वे. ७.६.२) । ‘श्र॒थय॑’ (‘श्र॒थया॑,’ अ.वे. १.११.३)। ‘र्हा-(ह्रा?)दुनी’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १२.७.८, not found in ŚAV)। ‘स॒हस्र॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.१०.२)। ‘अ॒र्कः’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.५)।

184अध्याय १, पाद २ Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara adds another important consideration, namely that the term saṃyukta not only excludes the cases of abhinidhāna, but that it also excludes the cases of abhiniṣṭāna as defined in CA (1.2.1: विसर्ज- नीयोऽभिनिष्टानः). Additionally, he includes the combination of an anusvāra with a consonant under the term saṃyukta. Such a separate listing of the anusvāra is prompted by the unclear position of the anusvāra in relation to the distinction between vowels and consonants. The RPR (1.22: अनुस्वारो व्यञ्जनं च) also lists anusvāra separately, because of the ambiguous position of the anusvāra, cf. RPR (1.5: अनुस्वारो व्यञ्जनं वा स्वरो वा). १.२.१०. पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परम् । Whitney (1.50). G: 1.2.10. I: 10. Translation: The final half-mora of the previous [consonant, in a case of consonant+consonant combination) has the same karaṇa [= articulator or mode of articulation?] as the following [consonant]. Note: Whitney first says that the word karaṇa in the rule should not be restricted to the notion of ‘organ,’ or articulator, but should be broadly in- terpreted in the sense of ‘mode of production.’ He then points out the main difficulty in interpreting this rule: “Of the accuracy of the physical observations which could discover any actual assimilation of the first element of these (e.g. ts, st) and other similar combinations, in its final portion, to the latter, I find it hard to say much in praise: I am unable to discover that any part of the t in vat- sau becomes an s, or any part of s in vaste a t, any more than the s and t. One way of interpreting this rule is to say that in combinations like ts, the transition between t and s is marked by something like th which shares the features of both t and s. The rule in general may mark the propensity toward progressive assimilation.” Also compare Heffner (1952: 120): “The precise nature of the move- ments made to effect the contact of a stop consonant are determined (a) by the position or positions at which the stop is produced, and (b) by the position or positions from which the articulating organs have to move to get there. Any sound produced during these movements is inevitably a constantly changing sound: the contact phase or the onset of stop consonants is therefore sometimes called the on-glide of the consonant. Usually the audible sound produced by this onset is a modification of the preceding speech sound, whether vowel or consonant.” The CA may be hinting at a modification of this type.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका185 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परं परेण भवति। ‘व॒त्सौ(H, N: त्सो) वि॒राजः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.९. १)। ‘स्तोमा॑ आसन्’ (अ.वे. १४.१.८)। ‘अ॒यं व॑स्ते’ (अ.वे. १३.१.१६)। अपर आह - पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परम् । प्रत्ययेन भवेत्कार्यमेतत्संयुक्तमिष्यते । Note: Whitney draws our attention to the fact that this rule is itself a half Śloka and as such seems to have been quoted from another metrical source, and that the commentary quotes it as the first half of a verse. This raises a possibility that the metrical authority is older than the CA. It seems less likely that a text would take a line from the CA and would turn it into a full Śloka by adding a second half. भा.भा.वृत्ति - अभिनिष्टानादिसंज्ञकेषु संयोगेषु पूर्वरूपस्य व्यञ्जनस्य विसर्गानुस्वारादेश्च परं व्यञ्जनं समानकरणं स्यात्। पूर्वाङ्गतां प्राप्नुयादित्यर्थः । तेन तदुच्चारे मात्रार्धं कालः स्यान्नाधिकः । व्यञ्जनस्यापि मात्रार्धः कालस्तथैवा- भिनिष्टानप्रभृतीनामित्यर्थः । ‘कक्त क॑फो॒डौ’ (Whitney’s AV: क॑फौ॒डौ, अ.वे. १०.२.४)। ‘च॒तुर्भ्यः॒’ (अ.वे. १.१२. ४)। ‘दि॒वस्पृ॒ष्ठम्’ (अ.वे. ४.१४.२)। ‘श॒तव॑ल्शाः’ (अ.वे. ६.३०.२)। ‘दुः॒ष्वप्न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.४६.३)। ‘स॒पक्ती॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.१८.१)। ‘आर्क्ति॑योः’ (‘आर्त्न्योः,’ अ.वे.पै.सं. १४.२.१३, not in ŚAV, ‘आर्क्ति॑योः,’ तै.सं. ४.५.१.३)। १.२.११. ह्रस्वं लघ्वसंयोगे । Whitney (1.51). G: 1.2.11. Translation: A short [syllable, i.e. a syllable with a short vowel], when not followed by a consonant cluster, is [metri- cally called] light.

186अध्याय १, पाद २ Note: Whitney correctly takes the rule as referring to a syllable: “The distinction of syllables, as regards their metrical value, is properly into light (laghu) and heavy (guru); long (dīrgha) and short (hrasva) are terms to be used of vowels only. The neuter gender of the terms in the rule is to be explained by their agreement with akṣaram, ‘syllable,’ understood.” While the CAB does not explicitly refer to the agreement with the term akṣaram, this is clearly seen in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ह्रस्वं लघुसंज्ञं भवति । असंयोगे । ‘दधि॑’ (अ.वे. २०.१२७.९)। ‘मधु॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - ह्रस्वमक्षरं लघुसंज्ञकं स्यान्न तु संयोगे । संयोगोऽत्राभिनिष्टानादीनामुपलक्षणम् । ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.२. ४)। ‘वि’ (अ.वे. १.१.४)। ‘नु’ (अ.वे. २.५.५)। ‘कृ॒- तम्’ (अ.वे. ३.९.२)। ‘च॒[ा]कॢ॒पे’ (अ.वे. ७.८७.१, VV- RI edn.: ७.९२.१)। संयोगे परे तु गुरुत्वं स्यात्। ‘अ॒प्सु’ (अ.वे. १.४.४)। ‘पक्ती॑’ (अ.वे. २.१२.१)। ‘व्यन्तु॑’ (अ.वे. ७.४९.२, VVRI edn.: ७.५१.२)। ‘कक्त क॑फो॒डौ’ (Whitney’s AV: क॑फाै॒डौ, अ.वे. १०.२.४)। ‘ति॒स्रः’ (अ.वे. ३.२४.६)। ‘जिग्ये’ (not attested in any known Vedic text)। ‘विश्व॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.१०.२)। ‘निन्दा’ (नि॒न्दाः, अ.वे. ११. ८.२२, VVRI edn.: ११.१०.२२)। ‘उत्सः॑’ (अ.वे. ६. १०६.१)। ‘रु॒द्रः’ (अ.वे. १.१९.३)। ‘शुक्ल॑म्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १६.१२७.१-५, not in ŚAV)। ‘शुष्क॑म्’ (not in AV, अ.वे. पै.सं. १७.१४.४, ऋ.वे. २.१३.६)। ‘बुक्तम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ८.१४.८)। ‘वृ॒क्षः’ (अ.वे. ४.७.५)। ‘कृ॒ष्णम्’ (अ.वे. ६. २२.१)। ‘गृत्स॑म्’ (ऋ.वे. ३.१९.१)। ‘पृक्तम्’ (not attested in any known Vedic text)। ‘नृत्यम्’ (शां.ब्रा. २९.५, not attested in any Saṃhitā)। ‘कॢप्तिः’ (माध्यं.शु.य.सं. १८. ११; काण्व.शु.य.सं. १९.३.२; तै.सं. ४.७.२.२.; मै.सं.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका187 २.११.३)। ‘कॢप्तम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ५.१६.५)। ‘अंशः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.२)। ‘इन्द्रः॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.३)। ‘मु॒ञ्च’ (अ.वे. १.१२. ३)। ‘कृन्तति’ (कृ॒न्त॒ती, अ.वे. १.२७.२)। ‘हृ॒दः’ (अ.वे. ३.२५.६)। ‘क॒लशः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.१.६)। ‘यः पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.४.१७)। ‘नॄँक्त पात्रम्’ (शौनकशिक्षा, श्लोक २७, पृ. २२, ed. by K.N.M. Divakara Dvijendra, Tripunithura, 1962)। Note: For नॄँक्त पात्रम् and similar other examples, see: RPR (4.78): नॄँक्त पतिभ्यो नॄँक्त प्रणेत्रं नॄँक्त पात्रं स्वतवाँक्त पायुः । सन्धिर्विक्रान्त एवैषः । १.२.१२. गुर्वन्यत् । Whitney (1.52). G: 1.2.12. Translation: [Any] other syllable [is called] heavy. Note: Under the category of heavy syllable, we include (a) syllables with long vowels, and (b) syllables with short vowels followed by consonant clusters. Bhārgava-Bhāskara also adds syllables which end in consonants and visarga. He adds one more category, i.e. syllables with specially accented vowels, i.e. syllables with svarita vowels. This last category is not substanti- ated by any other text, and probably rests on a faulty citation from Piṅgala’s Chandaḥsūtra. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s citation reads तथा स्वरव्यञ्जनान्तम्, and this forces him to come up with this last category. The original reading from Piṅgala is: प्लुतस्वरं व्यञ्जनान्तम्. Here Piṅgala specifically adds the tri-moraic pluta vowels. This would be automatically taken care of by our CA rule. What is the purpose of defining the terms laghu and guru? These notions are not purposefully used ever again in the CA, the way they are used either by Pāṇini, or by the metrical texts. The commentary of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa on this rule clearly says: अत्र शास्त्रे लघुगुरुप्रयोजनाभावः, ‘there is no purpose for the terms light and heavy in this system.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - गुरु भवति अन्यत् । ह्रस्वं च संयोगे । दीर्घप्लुतौ च । ‘तक्ष॑ति’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.२१)। ‘रक्ष॑ति’

188अध्याय १, पाद २ (अ.वे. ८.९.१३)। ‘शालाः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१०)। ‘भू॑या३ इ॒दा३म्’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१८)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - लघुसंज्ञायाः अन्यदक्षरं गुरुसंज्ञम् । तथा च छन्दःशास्त्रे चोक्तं पिङ्गलनागाचार्येण (छन्दःसूत्र, १.४) - दीर्घं संयोगपरं तथा स्वरव्यञ्जनान्तमूष्मान्तम् । सानुस्वारं च गुरु क्वचिदवसानेऽपि लघ्वन्त्यम् ॥ इति । दीर्घं गुरु स्यात् । ‘अ॒श्विना॑’ (अ.वे. ३.३.४)। ‘पृ॒थि॒वी’ (अ.वे. २.१५.१)। ‘बा॒हू’ (अ.वे. ४.२.५)। ‘पि॒तॄ॒णाम्’ (अ.वे. २.१२.४)। ‘त॒न्वे’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘है’ (अ.वे. ६.५०.२)। ‘ओ’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१)। ‘दे॒वौ’ (अ.वे. ३.२९.६)। प्लुतं गुरु स्यात् । ‘आ ब॑भूवाँ३’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। संयोगपरम् । ‘स॒त्यम्’ (अ.वे. २.१५. ५)। ‘विष्णुः॒’ (अ.वे. ३.२७.५)। ‘चि॒त्रम्’ (अ.वे. १३.२. ३४)। ‘पु॒त्रः’ (अ.वे. १.२५.३)। ‘गृ॒ह्णाति॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७६. ४)। ‘कॢप्तिः’ (not in AV, कठ.सं. २८.८, माध्यं.शु.य.सं. १८.११, काण्व.शु.य.सं. १९.३.२, तै.सं. ४.७.२.२, मै.सं. २.११.३, काठक.सं. १८.८)। स्वरः । स्वरितः। ‘स्वरा- भ॑रत्’ (अ.वे. १३.२.३९) । व्यञ्जनान्तम् । अस्वरे परे । ‘बट्’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२९)। ‘अ॒स्मिन्’ (अ.वे. १.९.१)। ‘अ॒क्तिम्’ (अ.वे. १.६.२)। ‘बा॒हुम्’ (अ.वे. १८.१.११)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। ‘सकृ॑त्’ (अ.वे. २०.११६. २)। ऊष्मान्तम् । ऊष्मा विसर्गः । ‘अ॒पः’ (अ.वे. १.४.३)। ‘अ॒क्तिः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘ऋ॒तुः’ (अ.वे. ७.४९.२, VVRI edn.: ७.५१.२)। सानुस्वारं व्यञ्जने परे । ‘इन्द्रं वै’ (तां.म.ब्रा. १२.६.८)। ‘अ॒क्तिं च॑’ (अ.वे. १.६.२)। ‘शत्रुं च’ (?)। ‘अव्॑ांतु’ (अ.वे. १८.३.१५)। पदान्तस्य विरामे तु नानुस्वारः किन्तु मकार एव । ‘अ॒क्तिम्ऽइ॑व’ (अ.वे.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका189 ७.४५.१, VVRI edn.: ७.४७.१)। ‘दे॒वम्’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.७)। यस्य छन्दसः पादान्ते गुरुरेव विहितः तत्र लघ्वक्षरमागतं चेत् तद् गुरुरेवेति विज्ञेयम् । छन्दःशास्त्रे आर्याप्रभृतिषु द्रष्टव्यम् । ‘न वदति सद्वै करोत्येव’ (source?)। अत्र[ा]न्ते वकारो लघुरपि गुरुः स्यादिति ज्ञेयम्। ‘विप्राद् द्विषड्गुणयुतादरविन्दनाभः’ (source?) इत्यत्र पादान्ते भकारो गुरुरेव ‘वसन्ततिलका त्भौ जौ गौ’ (छन्दःसूत्र ७.८) इति गुरुस्थाने प्रयुक्तत्वात् लघोरपि गुरुत्वम् । १.२.१३. अनुनासिकं च । Whitney (1.53). G: 1.2.13. Translation: [A syllable with] a nasalized [vowel is] also [heavy]. Note: From a metrical point of view of the late MIA period, there is a distinction between nasalizing a vowel and adding an anusvāra. For instance, referring to Jaina Prakrits, A.M. Ghatage (1941: 11) says: “The Anunāsika does not change the quantity of a syllable, but Anusvāra makes it long.” It is not quite clear what the situation was in Sanskrit, because the nasalized vowels are not attested in metrical texts where the nasalization would make metrical difference. Pāṇini distinguishes an anunāsika from an anusvāra, cf. P.8.3.4 (अनुनासिकात् परोऽनुस्वारः). It is clear that nasalization has nothing to do with the light/contrast. What is not clear is whether an anusvāra made a vowel long. However, the CA does not make any such clear distinction between an anusvāra and an anunāsika vowel, and while it does use the term anunāsika, it does not use the term anusvāra. Varma (1929: 148) argues that in spite of the fact that the CA does not use the term anusvāra, it has the same notion of anusvāra as other phonetic texts. For a detailed discussion of the complicated issues, see: Varma (1929: 148ff); Allen (1953: 40ff). In any case, the CA considers a nasalized short vowel to form a heavy syllable. In terms of its met- rical value, the notion of anunāsika in the CA is functionally identical with that of anusvāra elsewhere. For instance, verse (1.4) from Piṅgala’s Chandaḥsūtra

190अध्याय १, पाद २ quoted in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on the previous rule makes a sānusvāra ‘a vowel with the [following] anusvāra’ into a heavy syllable. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनुनासिकं च गुरु भवति । ‘द्वे च॑ मे विंश॒तिश्च॑ मे’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.२)। ‘ति॒स्रश्च॑ मे त्रिं॒शच्च॑ मे’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.३)। ‘चत॑स्रश्च मे चत्वारिं॒शच्च॑ मे’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.४)। ‘पुमा॑न् पुं॒सः’ (अ.वे. ३.६.१)। ‘तत्र॑ पुं॒स- व॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.१)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - ह्रस्वं यदनुनासिकतां प्राप्तं तदपि गुरु स्यात् । ‘पु॒रु॒ष्टु॒तँ॒ एकः॑’ (अ.वे. २०.६१.६) । १.२.१४. पदान्ते च । Whitney (1.54). G: 1.2.14. I: पादान्ते च । Translation: Also at the end of a word [before pause, as in the Padapāṭha, a syllable is considered to be heavy]. Note: The Sanskrit tradition is more familiar with short syllables at the end of metrical lines being treated heavy for metrical purposes. This accounts for the variant reading पादान्ते च in ms. I. Also see Bhārgava- Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.2.12). The examples cited by the CAB make Whitney think that the rule is re- stricted to such final syllables as end with a consonant, and in corroboration, he refers to TPR (xxii. 14. 15). However, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary in- cludes word-final short vowels, as well as final syllables with short vowels, ending in a consonant. This would indicate that in the recitation of the ŚAV Padapāṭha as known to Bhārgava-Bhāskara, the word-final short vowels were recited as long vowels. This possibility is missed by Whitney and Allen (1953: 85). Since such a recitational practice was commonplace for short vowels occurring at the end of metrical feet, it seems likely to have been ex- tended to all final vowels before pause.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका191 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्ते च गुरु भवति । ‘गो॒धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒षत्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - विरामे ह्रस्वम् । ह्रस्वोपधं च गुरु स्यात् । ‘स्म॒’ (अ.वे. १.८.२)। ‘हि’ (अ.वे. १.५.१)। ‘तु’ (अ.वे. ४.१८.६)। ‘तत्’ (अ.वे. १.१६.२)। ‘इत्’ (अ.वे. १.२. ४)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। ‘कृत्’ (अ.वे. २.२७. ६)। ‘इन्द्रः॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.३)। ‘अ॒क्तिः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘क्रतुः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२२)। १.२.१५. परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि । Whitney (1.55). G: 1.2.15. Translation: [In the syllabic segmentation], consonants belong to the following vowel. Note: As Whitney notes, most Prātiśākhyas agree with each other on this doctrine. Thus, the word dadhi would be segmented into da-dhi, and madhu would be segmented into ma-dhu. Varma (1929: 55ff) has gone into a detailed examination of the rules of syllabication in the Prātiśākhyas. Also see: Allen (1953: 81ff). This is of course a general rule. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary offers many examples of word-initial consonant-clusters which go with the following vowel. Allen (1953: 82) considers the CA treatment of syllabic division as rep- resenting the generic rules. He also shows that other Prātiśākhyas hold dif- fering views on this matter: “the RP allows either the division of a medial consonant-group or its attachment in toto to the following vowel, and the TP attaches to the following vowel a group consisting of consonant+semivowel or stop+fricative.” Allen refers to Chatterji’s opinion that the Nāgarī graphic system may be based on such a syllabic structure. My own conjecture is that the syllabic division allowed by these two texts may have been a result of confusing the notion of written syllable with a spoken syllable, as is certainly evidenced by the syllabic division of the famous Gāyatrī mantra found in one of the Atharva-Pariśiṣṭas, i.e. Anulomakalpa (p.146, Atharvaveda-Pariśiṣṭa,

192अध्याय १, पाद २ edited by Ram Kumar Rai, Chowkhamba Orientalia, Banaras, 1976): त–त्स– वि–तु–र्व–रे–णि–यं–भ–र्गो–दे–व–स्य etc. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि भवन्ति। ‘दधि॑’ (अ.वे. २०.१२७.९)। ‘मधु॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२) । भा.भा.वृत्ति - स्वराः केवले सव्यञ्जनाश्चाक्षरसंज्ञाः सन्ति । अतो व्यञ्जनानि कस्याक्षरस्याङ्गानि भवन्तीत्युच्यते । व्यञ्जनानि परस्य स्वरस्याङ्गं भवन्तीत्यर्थः । ‘स्वस्मै’ (not attested in known Vedic texts)। ‘कार्त्स्न्ये’ (not attested in known Vedic texts)। ‘विश्चपत्न्या’ (?, ‘विश्वप्स्न्या,’ अ.वे. पै.सं. १.४१.३, ‘वि॒श्पत्न्यै॑,’ अ.वे. ७.४६.२)। ‘स्फ्ये’ (‘स्फ्यौ,’ अ.वे. ११.३.९)। ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.२.४)। ‘प्र’ (अ.वे. ४.३३.३)। ‘नि’ (अ.वे. १५.११.२)। ‘श्रीः’ (अ.वे. ११.७.३, VVRI edn.: ११.९.३)। ‘नु’ (अ.वे. २. ५.५)। ‘द्रु’ (only in combinations like ‘द्रुपदात्,’ अ.वे. ६. ११५.२)। ‘द्यु’ (only in forms like द्युवम्, अ.वे. ७.५०. ९, VVRI edn.: ७.५२.९)। १.२.१६. संयोगादि पूर्वस्य । Whitney (1.56). G: 1.2.16. G: °दिः°. Translation: [A consonant occurring] at the beginning of a consonantal cluster belongs to the previous [syllable]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संयोगादि पूर्वस्य स्वरस्य भवति । ‘अत्र सति’ (आत्रसति?)। ‘आद्रवति’ (the only AV form, ‘आद्रवत्,’ अ.वे.पै.सं. २.३१.२)। ‘प्रद्रवति’ (no attested AV forms for प्र+द्रु)। अपर आह - हसयमं पूर्वस्येति (सयमं पूर्वस्येति?)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका193 Note: Compare a similar passage in the commentary on CA (3.2.3) and the Note thereupon for a possible reconstruction as: अपर आह - सयमं पूर्वस्येति. Also compare the wording of VPR (1.102: संयोगादिः पूर्वस्य). While Whitney may be right in criticizing the CAB for offering fabri- cated examples like atra sati, it is not clear to me what to make of Whitney’s following comment: “he (= commentator) does not note for us the fact that, in the combinations which he presents, the former consonant is to be doubled, by iii. 28, and then inform us to which of the two products of duplication the pre- cept of the rule applies.” The rule seems to be a generic enough rule, giving a basic principle, and it does not matter at this stage what the length of the con- sonant-cluster is. The passage of the commentary अपर आह हसयमं पूर्वस्येति probably re- stores to अपर आह - सयमं पूर्वस्येति. This comment would then mean that an ini- tial consonant of a cluster, along with yama, belongs to the previous syllable. भा.भा.वृत्ति - पदान्तसन्धिकरणे पूर्वपदान्तव्यञ्जनमेकं वा द्वे व्यञ्जने वा अनुस्वारो वा विसर्गो वा अक्षरवर्णने व्यञ्जने परे संयोगे परे वा पूर्वस्याङ्गं भवति । संयोगस्यादि । संयोगे परे आदिरिति द्विविधसमासकरणात् । संयोगस्यादिः । ‘तच्चक्षुः॑’ (ऋ.वे. ७.६६.१६)। ‘रि॒षक्त पा॑तु॒’ (अ.वे. ८.३. १)। ‘कक्त क॑फो॒डौ’ (Whitney’s AV: ‘क॑फाै॒डौ,’ अ.वे. १०.२.४)। ‘श॒तं ते॒’ (अ.वे. ३.११.४)। संयोगपरे आदिः । ‘ऊर्ग्भिः’ (not attested in Vedic known texts)। ‘हा॒य॒नान्द्वे’ (अ.वे. ८.२.२१)। ‘अदब्धान्स्पृणुहि’? (Whitney: ‘आर॑ब्धा-न्त्स्पृणुहि,’ अ.वे. ८.३.७)। पदान्तसन्धीति किम् । ‘अ॒क्षैः’ (अ.वे. ७.५०.१, VVRI edn.: ७.५२.१)। ‘विश्व॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.१०.२)। ‘अन्तः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.१४, VVRI edn.: ९.१५. १४)। ‘इन्द्रः॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.३)। ‘आर्क्ती॑’ (अ.वे. १.१. ३)। ‘विश्पक्तैः’? (‘वि॒श्पत्न्यै॑,’ अ.वे. ७.४६.२)। अत्र भत्वम् । अयस्मयादित्वात् । तेन शकारस्थितिः । व्यञ्जन-त्रयसंयोगे

194अध्याय १, पाद २ किञ्चिद्विशेषो ग्रन्थान्तरात् । अक्षरनिर्देशो विवक्षुणा यथेच्छमुच्चार्यते । द्विसंयोगः त्रिसंयोगो वा । इन्द्र-शब्दे द्रशब्दः । स्फ्य इत्यत्र फ्यकार इत्यादि ज्ञेयम् । एवं व्यञ्जनचतुष्कादौ च । ‘कार्त्स्न्यम्’ (not attested in known Vedic texts, late epic form)। ‘आ॒व॒र्त्स्यन्’ (अ.वे. १५.६.७)। १.२.१७. पद्यं च । Whitney (1.57). G: 1.2.17. Translation: A word-final consonant [before pause] also [belongs to the previous syllable]. Note: The term padya has been defined in CA (1.1.5: पदान्तः पद्यः) as referring to the sound occurring at the end of a pada. Also see the Note on CA (1.1.7) for further clarification of the meaning of pada. Though the term gener- ally refers to an inflected item, it occasionally refers to members of compounds and to pre-affixal nominal bases. The CAB examples only illustrate the stan- dard word-final consonants. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पद्यं च पूर्वस्वरस्य भवति । ‘गो॒धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒षत्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - अवसाने पदान्ते यद् व्यञ्जनं । चात् व्यञ्जने परेऽनुस्वाराभिनिष्टानौ पूर्वस्यैवाङ्गं स्यात् । ‘तत्’ (अ.वे. १.१६.२)। ‘ष॒ट्’ (अ.वे. ४.११.१)। ‘तम्’ (अ.वे. १.१६.४)। ‘सः’ (अ.वे. १.८.१)। ‘ऊर्क’ (not in AV)। ‘सु॒हार्द(र्त?)’ (अ.वे. २.७.५)। ‘सुहाः’ (अ.वे. २.७.५)। Note: The manuscript variation suhārt / suhāḥ for AV (2.7.5) is noted in the VVRI edition, as well as in the VVRI concordance, Sec. I, Pt. V, p. 3440.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका195 Bhārgava-Bhāskara also points out that by the force of ca ‘and,’ the rule also refers to anusvāra and visarga as they occur before consonants (व्यञ्जने परे). This would assume that the rule applies to the Saṃhitāpāṭha, where the final sound of the previous word is immediately followed, without a gap, by the initial of the next word. It is doubtful whether the rule is meant to apply to word-final consonants in other than pre-pausal situations. In all prob- ability, the rule applies only to the Padapāṭha. १.२.१८. रेफहकारक्रमजं च । Whitney (1.58). G: 1.2.18. Translation: [A consonant] resulting from doubling (krama) [on account of the preceding] r and h [also belongs to the previous syllable along with the preceding r and h]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफहकारक्रमजं च पूर्वस्य स्वरस्य भवति । ‘अ॒र्कः’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.५)। ‘अर्थः’ (माध्यं.शु.य. सं. १८.५; काण्व.शु.य.सं. १९.५.३; तै.सं. ४.७.५.२; मै. सं. २.११.५; not in AV, Whitney’s emendation: ‘अर्च॑,’ अ.वे. २०.५१.१)। ‘गर्त्ते’ (ऋ.वे. ५.६२.५; not in AV, Whitney’s emendation: ‘वर्तः,’ as in ‘अ॒भी॒व॒र्तः,’ अ.वे. १.२९.३)। ‘भक्तः’ (?, षक्तिंशब्राह्मण १.४.१६; not in any Saṃhitā, Whitney’s emendation: ‘भर्गः॑,’ अ.वे. १९.३७.१)। ‘प्राह्णः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘पूर्वाह्णः’ (not in AV, ‘पर्व॒ाह्णे,’ ऋ.वे. १०.३४.११)। ‘अ॒प॒रा॒ह्णः’ (अ.वे. ९.६. ४६)। ‘अपब्रह्मलयति’ (not in known Vedic texts, Whitney’s emendation: ‘अप ह्मलयति,’ not in known Vedic texts)। ‘विह्मलयति’ (not in known Vedic texts)। ‘अपह्नुते’ (not in known Vedic texts)। ‘विह्नुते’ (not in known Vedic texts)। ‘ब्रह्म॑’ (अ.वे. १.१९.४)।

196अध्याय १, पाद २ Note: Whitney justifiably complains about the lack of specificity in the explanation given by the CAB, and the lax orthography of the examples as found in the mss. does not offer any help either. However, what the rule means is clear. CA (3.2.8: रेफहकारौ परं ताभ्याम्), like P.8.4.46 (अचो रहाभ्यां द्वे), prescribes doubling of the consonant following r and h. Thus, for instance, in the example arkaḥ, by applying CA (3.2.8), we get the sequence arkkaḥ. The present rule then says that the first of the doubled consonant, along with the preceding r or h, becomes part of the previous syllable, i.e. the syllabic division is ark-kaḥ, rather than ar-kkaḥ. The writing of the mss. does not show these doubled consonants in the examples. Whitney includes the example विह्नुते on the basis of other passages in his manuscript, though this example is not found in the commentary on this rule in the manuscript H which was the only manuscript accessible to Whitney. Interestingly, the manuscript N supports Whitney’s inclusion of this example. Also see the commentary on CA (3.2.8) and the Note thereupon. The only Saṃhitā form attested for vi+!hnu imanuscript variant vihnutasya for vi- hvr̥tasya in PAV (20.13.8). Also compare the text of the commentary on CA 3.2.8. The readings of the examples there support Whitney’s emendations in most cases. भा.भा.वृत्ति - क्रमः व्यञ्जनस्य द्वित्वं तृतीयाध्याये द्वितीय- पादे वक्ष्यते। रेफहकाराभ्यां स्वरात्पराभ्यां परस्य व्यञ्जनस्य द्विर्भावो यत्र भवति तत्र क्रमजं व्यञ्जनं रेफहकारेण सह पूर्वाङ्गं स्यात् । ‘अ॒र्क्कः’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.५)। ‘गृ॒ह्ण्णाति॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७६.४)। Note: We are happily surprised that Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commen- tary answers all the objections Whitney had against the CAB. It gives a crisp interpretation, and the ms. G shows the doubled consonants in writing. Be- sides other elements in the interpretation, Bhārgava-Bhāskara appropriately points out that this doubling of the consonant after r or h occurs only if this group comes after a vowel (स्वरात् पराभ्याम्). This condition on CA (3.2.8: रेफ- हकारौ परं ताभ्याम्) is provided by the continuing expression svarāt from CA (3. 2.3). Unfortunately, the CAB on CA (3.2.3) does not make this clear. With this condition, CA (3.2.8) becomes a close equivalent of P.8.4.46 (अचो रहाभ्यां द्वे).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका197 १.२.१९. एकमात्रो ह्रस्वः । Whitney (1.59). G: 1.2.19. Most mss. read rhasvaḥ. Translation: [A vowel] with one mora [duration] is called “short.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकमात्रो ह्रस्वो भवति । ‘दधि॑’ (अ.वे. २०.१२७.९)। ‘मधु॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२) । भा.भा.वृत्ति - यस्याक्षरस्योच्चारणे एकमात्राकालो जायते तदक्षरं ह्रस्वसंज्ञं ज्ञेयम् । ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.२.४)। ‘प्र’ (अ.वे. ४.३३.३)। ‘स्म’ (अ.वे. १.८.२)। ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.९.४, VVRI edn.: ९.१४.४)। ‘नि’ (अ.वे. १५.११.२)। ‘वि’ (अ.वे. १.१.४)। ‘स्फ्य’ (only attested AV form: ‘स्फ्यौ,’ अ.वे. ११.३.९)। ‘स्व’ (‘स्वः,’ अ.वे. १.१९.३)। Note: Referring to the Indian attempts to fix the duration of vowels etc. in minute units of 1/8 of a mora etc., Allen (1953: 84) says: “this un- phonological approach undergoes a further degeneration in statements such as the following (from the Pāṇinīya-Śikṣā verse 49): ‘1 mātrā is equivalent to the cry of the blue jay, 2 mātrās to that of the crow, 3 mātrās to that of the pea- cock, and 1/2 mātrā to that of the mongoose.’” I certainly agree with Allen that such descriptions are unphonological. However, I do not believe that it rep- resents any degeneration. Part of the problem lies in using the dichotomy of phonetic versus phonological in reference to Indian texts, which know of no such overt theoretical distinction. I have discussed some of these issues in the Introduction. Secondly, once we realize that a mātrā is a unit of time, there ought to be at least an approximate indication of how long a unit of time a mātrā is and such a need is fulfilled by the statements like the one quoted from the Pāṇinīya-Śikṣā. Another reason I am not willing to accept the notion of degeneration is that it assumes that the earlier texts were free from this practice. However, even the great Pāṇini seems to refer to a rooster-call in his rule defining the duration of short, long and extra-long vowels, cf. P.1.2.27 (ऊकालोऽज्झरस्वदीर्घप्लुतः)Whitney also refers to RPR (xiii. 20) which “attempts to fix the length of the short, long, and protracted vowels, by comparing them with the cries of certain birds.” Many texts in Indian music also define the

198अध्याय १, पाद २ various musical notes by referring to bird-calls. In a pre-modern age, these were the only available means of approximately indicating the length, pitch etc. The one point which goes against trying to fix the absolute duration of short, long etc. is that the Sanskrit grammarians do admit that there are different modes of delivery (vr̥tti) such as fast (druta), medium (madhya), and slow (vilambita), and that fixing absolute durations would militate against the notion of different speeds of delivery. Whitney, I believe, is correct in saying: “It is the fundamental measure, which cannot itself be defined by anything else.” १.२.२०. व्यञ्जनानि च । Whitney (1.60). G: 1.2.20. Translation: The consonants too [are of one-mora duration each]. Note: Almost all other texts consider consonants to be of half-mora length. The commentary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara struggles in vain to reconcile the CA view with the general view. It does bring up the topic of the possible metrical value of setting a specific duration for consonants, but does not tackle it successfully. For a clear analysis of this subject, see: Allen (1953: 86). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यञ्जनानि च एकमात्राणि भवन्ति । ‘दधि॑’ (अ.वे. २०.१२७.९)। ‘मधु॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२) । भा.भा.वृत्ति - व्यञ्जनान्यप्येकमात्राकालजानीति वेदित- व्यम् । तानि कानि । उच्यते । स्वरात्पराणि पदान्ते स्थितानि संयोगपराणि (।) संयोगादीनि वा पद्यानि वा एक- मात्राणि स्युः । अन्यत्र बहुसंयोगेऽपि यत्र यत्र पराङ्गत्वं तस्यार्धमात्रैव ज्ञेया । ‘तत्’ (अ.वे. १.१६.२)। ‘तम्’ (अ.वे. १.१६.४)। ‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। ‘न्य॑क्’ (अ.वे. ६.९१.२)। एतादृशानामेकमात्रिकत्वादक्षरस्य गुरुत्वे मात्रा- द्वयं स्यात् । ‘तच्चक्षुः॑’ (ऋ.वे. ७.६६.१६)। ‘अ॒द्भ्यः’ (अ.वे. ३.३.३)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका199 १.२.२१. द्विमात्रो दीर्घः । Whitney (1.61). G: 1.2.21. Translation: [A vowel] with two-mora [duration] is a long [vowel]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्विमात्रो दीर्घो भवति । ‘शाला॑’ (अ.वे. ९.३.१७)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - यस्याक्षरस्योच्चारणे द्विमात्रकः कालो जायते स स्वरः दीर्घसंज्ञः । ‘आ’ (अ.वे. १.१४.३)। ‘पृ॒थि॒वी’ (अ.वे. २.१५.१)। ‘बा॒हू’ (अ.वे. ४.२.५)। ‘मा॒तॄः’ (अ.वे. ९.९.१०, VVRI edn.: ९.१४.१०)। ‘पि॒तॄन्’ (अ.वे. ५.३०.१)। ‘सर्वे॑’ (अ.वे. १.७.५)। ‘व॒न्दध्यै॑’ (अ.वे. २०. ३५.५)। ‘उ॒पो’ (अ.वे. १३.७.१६) । ‘दे॒वौ’ (अ.वे. ३. २९.६)। १.२.२२. त्रिमात्रः प्लुतः । Whitney (1.62). G: 1.2.22. I: 21. Translation: [A vowel] with three-mora [duration] is a pro- longed (pluta) [vowel]. Note: By convention, number 3 is written after a long vowel to indi- cate a pluta vowel. Also note that Patañjali occasionally refers to pluta vowels with four mātrās, cf. MB on P.1.1.51, (Kielhorn edn.), Vol. I, p. 120. On P.8.2.106, Patañjali clearly says that a pluta of four mora duration is desirable: इष्यत एव चतुर्मात्रः प्लुतः. Allen (1953: 84) notes: “The pluta or protracted vowel … is of rare occurrence and is bound to a very limited series of contexts; it represents the over-lengthening of the final vowel of a word or phrase and is used ‘in cases of questioning, especially of a balancing between two alterna- tives, and also of calling to a distance or urgently. For most phonological pur- poses, however, the pluta vowel may be ignored.” We need to keep in mind that there are occasions for non-final vowels undergoing protraction, cf. P.8.2.86 (गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्याप्येकैकस्य प्राचाम्). Also see CA (4.4.21: प्लुतश्चाप्लुतवत्), CA (1.4.6: अवशा आ बभूवाँ३ इतीतावेकारोऽप्लुतः) and P.6.1.129 (अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते)

200अध्याय १, पाद २ for non-pluta-like behavior of pluta vowels in certain contexts. All pluta vowels found in the text of the ŚAV are listed under CA (1.4.14). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - त्रिमात्र(ः) प्लुतो भवति । ‘भू॑या३ इ॒दा३म्’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१८)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - यस्य स्वरस्य ह्रस्वस्य दीर्घस्य वा प्लुतता विधीयते तदुच्चारणे मात्रात्रयं कालः स्यात् । त्रिमात्रः स्वरः प्लुत इत्यर्थः । आ । बभूव । ‘आ बभूवाँ’ (अ.वे. १०.२. २८)। ऋग्वेदे । विन्दति । ‘वि॒न्द॒ती॒ँ३’ (ऋ.वे. १०. १४६.१)। खण्वखे । खैमखे । ‘खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ मध्ये॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.१५)। प्लुत उदात्तः । एतद्वेदस्थानि प्लुतान्यग्रे सङ्ग्रहीष्यन्तेऽध्याये । इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः । H, N: प्रथमस्य द्वितीयपादः । ६२ । C, E, F: प्रथमस्य द्वितीयः पादः । A, B, D, J, M, P: द्वितीयः पादः । I: इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः । G: इत्यथर्ववेदांग- कौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गवभास्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयपादव्याख्या संपूर्णा। O: इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः ॥ २ ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ २१ ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रथमस्य द्वितीयः पादः ।६२। भा.भा.वृत्ति - अथाथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गवभा- स्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य द्वितीयपादव्याख्या संपूर्णा । २ । ____________________________________

॥ प्रथमोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ तृतीयः पादः ॥ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अथाथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गव- भास्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य तृतीयपादस्थसूत्रव्याख्यारभ्यते । तत्रादावादेशबोधनमुच्यते । ॐ३म् । १.३.१. षट्पुरसोरुकारोऽन्त्यस्य [।] दशदाशयोरादेश्च मूर्धन्यः । Whitney (1.63), G, O, P: combine this rule with the following. G: 1.3.1. B, C (corr), D, Hc, J, M (corr): षो for सो. E, G, I, Na (corr) read °पुरसो°, but others read °पुरुसो°. Na (orig), Ha: षुट्पुसो°. O: °षट्परसोदुका°. A, B, C, D, M: °रादेश्च°, others: °रादेशश्च° Translation: The final [consonants] of ṣaṣ and puras are replaced with u before the words daśa and dāśa, respectively, and the initial [d] of these two words is replaced with a cere- bral [ḍ]. Note: Whitney points out that the words ṣoḍaśa and puroḍāśa are not analyzed in the Padapāṭha, and are not restored to their theoretical original form in their repetition. This point is also made by Bhārgava-Bhāskara: अनयोर्नित्य- मेवंविधं रूपम् । न त्ववग्रहो, न समापत्तिः. In a way, Whitney is right in saying: “and our treatise, accordingly, according to its own programme, has nothing to do with them: and the same is true of the words referred to in the three following rules.” The original reason why these words are not analyzed in the Padapāṭha may be identical with sandehāt ‘excessive fusion / confusion of the consti- tuents’ given in CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्). See the Note on CA (4.2.5). The rules here mark progress of the analytical tradition beyond the state of sandeha manifest in the Padapāṭha. This is a move in the direction of general grammar. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - (षट्पुरसोरुकारोऽन्त्यस्य दशदाशयो- रादेश्च मूर्धन्यः) षट् पुरस्(H: पुरुष, N: पुरुस) इत्ये(H, N: त्य)तयोः उकारो भवति । अन्त्यस्य वर्णस्य । दशदाशयोः

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 202 परतः उत्तरपदादेश्च मूर्धन्यो भवति । ‘षोडशः’ (‘षो॒ड॒शम्’, अ.वे. ३.२९.१)। ‘पु॒रो॒डाशौ॑’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१२)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - (षट्पुरसोरुकारोऽन्त्यस्य दशदाशयोरादेश्च मूर्धन्यः) षट्शब्दस्य दशशब्दे परे पुरःशब्दस्य दाशशब्दे परे पूर्वपदान्तस्य षस्य सस्य च उत्वमुत्तरपदादेर्दस्य डत्वं भवति। षष् । पुरस् । ‘षोडश’ (‘षो॒ड॒शम्,’ अ.वे. ३.२९.१)। ‘पुरोडाशः’ (‘पु॒रो॒डाशाः॑,’ अ.वे. ८.८.२२)। अनयोर्नित्यमे- वंविधं रूपम् । न त्ववग्रहो न समापत्तिः । १.३.२. कृपे रेफस्य लकारः । Whitney (1.64). G: 1.3.2. Translation: The r of [the root] !kr̥p is replaced by l. Note: The rule is expected to apply to both, the r which is inside the vowel r̥ (∂r∂), as well as r occurring independently. Thus, effectively the rule changes kr̥p to kl̥p, and karp to kalp. The commentary CAB on this rule is missing in the manuscript H, and hence was not available to Whitney. It is, however, found in the ms. N. The Caturādhyāyībhāṣya offers examples of kr̥p changing to kl̥p, but not of karp changing to kalp. Such examples from the text of the ŚAV are offered by Bhārgava-Bhāskara. This rule also marks an advance beyond the Padapāṭha, which does not change l > r. There is also no Samāpatti of l to r. Thus, one may make a conjecture that the awareness of such a linkage of kr̥p to kl̥p may have arisen in the post-Padapāṭha period. Compare P.8.2.18 (कृपो रो लः). Also note that Pāṇini refers to the root as kr̥p, while the CA refers to the root with the form kr̥pi, with kr̥peḥ as a genitive. Whitney also makes an interesting comment: “None of the other Prātiśākhyas offers anything equivalent. If our treatise has set itself to note the words in which a l appears in the place of a more original r, it should not pass over the words in which the root car becomes cal, as avicācala, puṃścalī, etc., glaha and glahana, which are hardly to be separated from the root grah, udum- bala (viii.6.17), etc.” One can perhaps derive a different inference from the rule as it stands, as well as from a number of rules that follow. While in this case, the change of kr̥p to kl̥p is taught by the rule, suggesting that an etymological

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका203 linkage was acceptable to Indian grammarians, other cases mentioned by Whitney may not have been so acceptable to them. For example, Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha separately lists car, cal, grah, and glah. On the other hand, as CA (1.3.4: लकारस्य रेफः …) indicates, the author of the CA asks us to change l to r in a number of words, where modern linguists may perhaps think of the re- verse direction of historical change. In any case, the rule does not indicate any ‘historical’ change. It does indicate, however, that for some not very explicit reasons, the r was felt to be derivationally more basic in some words, while in other words the sound l was felt to be more basic. For a similar discussion, see: Patañjali on P.8.2.18 (कृपो रो लः). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - कृपे रेफस्य लकारो भवति । ‘अची॑- कॢपत्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.३)। ‘प॒ञ्च॒द॒शेन॑ कॢ॒प्ताः’ (अ.वे. ८.९. १५)। ‘सि॒नी॒वा॒ल्य॑चीकॢपत्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.३)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - कृपेः कृपधातोः ऋवर्णस्थरेफस्य लत्वं स्यात्। ततो गुणोऽपि यत्र भवितव्यः । ‘चकॢपे’ (‘चाकॢपे,’ अ.वे. ७.९२.१)। ‘कॢप्तम्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ५.१६.५)। ‘कॢप्तिः’ (not in AV, कठ.सं. २८.८, माध्यं.शु.य.सं. १८.११, काण्व. शु.य.सं. १९.३.२, तै.सं. ४.७.२.२, मै.सं. २.११.३, काठक.सं. १८.८)। ‘स॒ङ्क॒ल्पकु॑ल्मलाम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२५.२)। ‘कल्पनम्’ (not in AV, ‘कल्पना’, काठक.सं. ३५.५, कठ. सं. ४८.६)। ‘क॒ल्प॒यि॒त्वा’ (अ.वे. १३.१.५२)। ‘अक॑ल्पत’ (अ.वे. १३.१.४६)। ‘कल्प॑मानः’ (अ.वे. ३.८.१)। इत्या- दिसर्वव्याकरणेष्वयमेवैकः ऌकारः प्रयोगार्हः नान्यः । १.३.३. न कृपादीनाम् । Whitney (1.65). G: 1.3.3. Translation: [However, the change of r to l in the forms of the root kr̥p] does not occur in words like kr̥pā.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 204 Note: As Whitney points out: “This is the first instance in our treatise of a rule stated in this form, the words or phrases to which the precept con- tained in the rule refers being conceived to form a series, or gaṇa, of which the first only is given in the rule, and the others comprehended in an et cetera. The form of statement is characteristic of the Atharva Prātiśākhya (= CA) and of Pāṇini.” It is possible that the CA itself intended ‘et cetera,’ and may not have had a fixed list in mind. No fixed list is known to the APR, or the commenta- tors. Patañjali, under P.8.2.18 (कृपो रो लः), also makes a similar statement: कृपणादीनां प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः । कृपणः, कृपाणः, कृपीटम्. Referring to kr̥paṇaḥ and kārpaṇyam, Whitney says: “If these two words, which come from altogether another root, actually belong to the gaṇa, it should contain also kr̥pamāṇasya (v.19.13) and akr̥pran (xviii.3.23).” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न कृपादीनां रेफस्य लकारो भवति । ‘कृ॒पा पा॑वक’ (अ.वे. १८.४.५९)। ‘कृ॒पात्स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. ७. १४.२)। ‘कृपणः’ (‘कृ॒प॒णाः,’ अ.वे. ११.८.२८)। ‘कार्प- ण्यम्’ (not in known Vedic texts, a late epic form)। Note: While the manuscript H contains the reading कृपस्विः, Whitney’s conjecture कृपात्स्वः is supported by the manuscript N. Whitney’s edition of the AV and his Index Verborum also read कृ॒पात्स्वः॑. However, he thinks that the reading कृ॒पात्स्वः॑ “doubtless is a corrupt one, and should be kr̥pā svaḥ, as is read by both the Sāma and Yajur-Vedas, in their corresponding verses.” The VVRI edition (Vol. 2, p. 897-8) records कृ॒पात्स्वः॑, but notes that several sources, in- cluding Sāyaṇa’s commentary, do offer the reading कृ॒पा स्वः॑. भा.भा.वृत्ति - कृपधातोरुत्पन्नानां कृपादिशब्दानां पूर्वसूत्रोक्तं लत्वं नैव । ‘कृ॒पा’ (अ.वे. १८.४.५९)। ‘कृपणम्’ (अ.वे. पै.सं. १९.४१.५)। ‘कृपाणः’ (not in known Vedic texts, a classical form)। ‘कार्पण्यम्’ (not in known Vedic texts, an epic form)। ‘कर्पट’ (not in known Vedic texts, a classical form)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका205 Note: By citing examples like kr̥pāṇa, kārpaṇya, and karpaṭa, which do not appear in Vedic texts, the commentaries are using the Prātiśākhya rules to account for words of the later classical language. १.३.४. लकारस्य रेफः पादमङ्गुरिमित्येवमादीनाम् । Whitney (1.66), Hac: °लि° for °रि°. A, B, P(corr): Daṇḍa after रेफः. G: 1.3.4. Translation: In pādam aṅgurim etc., the sound l is replaced by r. Note: In his translation, Whitney says ‘In pādam aṅgulim etc.’ This is because, following his lone ms. H, he reads the rule itself as ‘… pādam aṅgulim …’ This is not supported by other manuscripts. However, Whitney did guess correctly: “It is not in accordance with the usage of our treatise else- where to give, in citing a word or phrase in a rule, another form than that which it actually has it in the text: we should have expected here पादमङ्गुरिमि°.” Whitney’s expectation is supported by the mss. Again it is not clear here if the text of the CA intended a fixed set of instances. The commentary of Bhārgava- Bhāskara probably correctly says that the expression ādi in the rule is to refer to this type of examples: आदिशब्दः प्रकारार्थः. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - लकारस्य रेफो भवति । पादमङ्गुरि- मित्येवमादीनाम् । ‘श॒श्रे पाद॑म॒ङ्गुरि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ४.१८.६; ५. ३१.११)। ‘स॒ह मू॑रा॒ननु॑ दह’ (अ.वे. ५.२९.११)। ‘या॒हि म॒यूर॑रोमभिः’ (अ.वे. ७.११७.१)। ‘अश्व॑स्य॒ वारः॑ प(H, N: पु)रु॒षस्य॒ वारः॑’ (अ.वे. १०.४.२)। आदिग्रहणं किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒ङ्गुलि॑भ्यो न॒खेभ्यः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३३.६)। ‘बाला॑स्ते॒ प्रोक्ष॑णीः सन्तु’ (अ.वे. १०.९.३)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - आदिशब्दः प्रकारार्थः । अङ्गुल्यादिशब्दानां रेफस्य लकारो व्यवस्थितविभाषया ज्ञेयः । तथा च लस्य रेफोऽपि । ‘व्याख्यानतो विशेषप्रतिपत्तिर्न हि सन्देहादलक्ष- णम्’ (Mahābhāṣya, on the Śivasūtra ‘लण्,’ Kielhorn-edn.,

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 206 Vol.I., p. 35) इति परिभाषया सूत्राद्बाह्योऽप्यर्थोऽङ्गीक्रियते । पादमङ्गुलिम् । पादमिति किम् । ‘अ॒ङ्गुरि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ४.१८. ६)। अलम् इत्यस्य अरम् । ‘अर॑ङ्कृतः’ (अ.वे. २.१२. ७)। ‘अ॒र॒ङ्ग॒मास॑[ः]’ (अ.वे. १३.२.३३)। लघोः रघुः । ‘र॒घु॒ष्य(G: ष्प)दः’ (अ.वे. ३.७.१)। मूलस्य ‘मूर॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.२८.३)। ‘वारः॑’ (अ.वे. १०.४.२)। ‘बालः’ (‘बालाः’, अ.वे. ९.७.८, VVRI edn.: ९.१२.८)। ‘वार॑वन्तम्’ (ऋ.वे. १.२७.१) ऋग्वेदे । ‘बाल’ (‘बालाः,’ अ.वे. ९.७.८, VVRI edn.: ९.१२.८)। ‘अश्रील’ (‘अ॒श्री॒रम्,’ अ.वे. ४. २१.६)। ‘अश्लीलः’ (‘अ॒श्ली॒ला,’ अ.वे. १४.१.२७)। ‘संमिश्र’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘संमिश्ल’ (‘संमि॑श्लः,’ अ.वे. २०.३८.५)। ‘विसर्पकः’ (not in AV)। ‘विसल्पक’ (‘वि॒सल्प॑कः,’ अ.वे. ६.१२७.३, Whitney’s AV: ‘वि॒सल्य॑- कः’)। पुरु । ‘पुलुकामः’ (ऋ.वे. १.१७९.५)। ‘पु॒ल्व॒घ[ः]’ (अ.वे. २०.१२६.२२)। उरू(रु?) । ‘उ॒लु॒लयः॑’ (अ.वे. ३.१९.६)। ‘सलिल’ (‘स॒लि॒लम्,’ अ.वे. ८.९.२)। ‘सरि- रस्य’ तैत्तिरीये (तै.सं. ४.२.१०.१)। ‘आश्लेषा’ (‘आ॒श्ले॒- षाः,’ अ.वे. १९.७.२)। ‘आश्रेषा’ (not in AV, a variant for āśleṣā in मै.सं. २.१३.२०)। ‘श्री’ (‘श्रीः,’ अ.वे. ११.७.३, VVRI ed., ११.९.३)। ‘श्लीपदम्’ (not in Vedic texts; śrīpada attested

Gāyatrī-Brāhmaṇa

119.11,

Kāṭhaka-Brāhmaṇa- Saṅkalana, ed. by Surya Kanta, Lahore, 1943; śīpatha in Baudhāyana-Śrauta-Sūtra 2.5.18)। ‘बभ्रु’ (‘ब॒भ्रुः,’ अ.वे. ५.२३.४)। ‘बभ्लुशाय’ तैत्तिरीये (तै.सं. ४.५.२.१)। ‘कसर्णीरः’ (not in AV, तै.सं. १.५.४. १)। ‘कसर्णील’ (‘क॒स॒र्णील॑म्,’ अ.वे. १०.४.५)। ‘रोम’ (‘रोमाणि,’ अ.वे. पै.सं. १६.१३९.१८; ‘रो॒म॒शम्,’ अ.वे. २०.१२६.१६)। ‘लोम॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१२.५)। ‘रराटम्’ (not in AV, माध्यं.शु.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका207 य.सं. ५.२, काण्व.शु.य.सं. ५.५.९, तै.सं. १.२. १३.३, मै.सं. १.२.९, काठक.सं. २.१०, कठ.सं. २.४)। ‘ललाटम्’ (अ.वे. ९.७.१, VVRI edn., ९.१२.१)। इत्यादि । Note: Referring to the testimony of the Vedic reciters used by S.P. Pandit, Lanman says: “The student should bear in mind the especial weight of the oral testimony in cases where errors of the eye, as distinguished from errors of the ear, are probable. Thus the testimony of the reciters, at ix.8(13).20, establishes the reading visalpa-, as against visalya- of the Berlin text. Save in AV., the word is otherwise unknown, and, the ms.-distinction between lya and lpa in such a case is worthless, the instance is a typical one to show the value of the reciters’ reading: see W’s note to vi.127.1,” Editor’s in- troduction, Whitney’s AV translation, Vol. I, pp. lxvi-lxvii. It may thus be said that, to some extent, Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s reading visalpaka is closer to the reading offered by the Vedic reciters. Also, it may be noted that while one does observe the variation visalpaka / visarpaka, the same cannot be said for the word visalyaka, which marks a greater deviation. As Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 967) informs: “For visalpakas (in AV 1the comm. gives visarpakas, explaining it as vividhaṃ saraṇaśīlo vraṇaviśeṣaḥ; Ppp. has viśa- lyakas.” In his commentary, Bhārgava-Bhāskara has given a very interesting collection of examples where the sounds r and l occur as variants. Some of these examples are also offered by Patañjali on P.8.2.18: वालमूललघ्वलमङ्गुलीनां वा लो रमापद्यत इति वक्तव्यम् । अश्वबालः अश्ववारः । मूलदेवः मूरदेवः । वरुणस्य लघुस्यदः वरुणस्य रघुस्यदः । अलं भक्ताय अरं भक्ताय । सुबाहुः स्वङ्गुलिः सुबाहुः स्वङ्गुरिः। संज्ञाछन्दसोर्वा कपिलकादीनामिति वक्तव्यम् । कपिरकः कपिलकः । तिल्विरीकः तिल्वि- लीकः। रोमाणि लोमानि । पांसुरं पांसुलम् । कर्म कल्म । शुक्रः शुक्लः । १.३.५. नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः । Whitney (1.67). G: 1.3.5. Translation: In the case of a deletion of n and m, the previous [vowel] is nasalized.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 208 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्य वर्णस्य अनुनासिको भवति । ‘विँ॒श॒तिः’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.२)। ‘पय॑ाँसि’ (अ.वे. १.९.३)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - पदान्तयोर्नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्वरस्यानुना- सिकः स्वरे परे । वनशब्दे च । महान् । ‘बण्म॒हाँ अ॑सि’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२९)। पणीन् । ‘प॒णी ँर॑भि’ (अ.वे. ५.११. ७)। दस्यून् । ‘दस्यूँरुप’ (not in AV, ‘दस्॑यूंरुत,’ अ.वे. ४. ३२.६)। पितॄन् । ‘पि॒तॄँरुप॑’ (अ.वे. १८.२.४)। वृक्षान् । ‘वृ॒क्षाँ वना॑नि’ (अ.वे. ६.४५.१)। मकारग्रहणमुत्तरार्थम् । Note: Referring to the CAB, Whitney says: “The commentator offers here only the words viṃśatiḥ (e.g. v.15.2) and payāṃsi (e.g. i.9.3) - which are very ill chosen, since, though each offers an example of a nasalized vowel, neither exhibits an elision of an original nasal mute, according to any rules contained in this treatise.” One must however point out that in the example payāṃsi, at least according to the Pāṇinian derivation, one would have a dele- tion of an n. Compare the examples offered by the commentators under P.8.3.24 (नश्चापदान्तस्य झलि). One crucial difference is that the Pāṇinian com- mentators assume that a form like yaśāṃsi is derived from the string yaśāns+i, where the n is replaced by the anusvāra by P.8.3.24. Instead of the notion of an anusvāra, the CAB speaks of an anunāsika as a replacement for the vowel preceding the deleted n. It is, however, not clear if such examples were in- tended by the author of the CA, and whether he intended a similar derivation for forms like payāṃsi. The deficiency pointed out by Whitney is made up by some of the examples offered by Bhārgava-Bhāskara. However, some of his examples, would properly come under the next rule. Additionally, Bhārgava-Bhāskara says that the inclusion of m serves no purpose in this rule, except that n and m together continue into the following rules. For the last example quoted by Bhārgava-Bhāskara, see CA 2.1.28. १.३.६. यरोष्मापत्तौ च । Whitney (1.68). G: 1.3.6. E, F, G, I, J (corr), O: परो° for यरो°.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका209 Translation: Also when [n and m] are changed [in sandhi] to y, r, or a spirant. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यकाररेफोष्मापत्तौ च पूर्वस्य वर्णस्या- नुनासिको भवति । ‘रथ॑ाँ इव’ (अ.वे. ५.१३.६)। ‘सा॒ला॒- वृ॒काँ॒ इ॑व’ (अ.वे. २.२७.५)। ‘खल्व॑ाँ इव’ (अ.वे. २.३१. १)। ‘ऋतूँर्ऋतुभिः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १६.१५१.७)। ‘ऋ॒तूँरु- त्सृ॑जते व॒शी’ (अ.वे. ६.३६.२)। ‘मो षु प॒णी ँर॒भि’ (अ.वे. ५.११.७) (H adds: ‘मो इति’)। ‘दस्॑यूँरु॒त बो॑धि’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.६)। ऊष्मणो ग्रहणात्सिद्धे पुनर्ग्रहणेन किम् । नित्य- त्वं न स्यात् । ‘ऋ॒तूँरुत्सृ॑जते व॒शी’ (अ.वे. ६.३६.२)। Note: The example ऋतूँर्ऋतुभिः cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. The last three examples cited by the CAB are found under APR (197). The last comment made by the CAB is not immediately clear. What does the term punar-grahaṇa refer to? Whitney says: “As the n must always be converted into the spirant visarjanīya before it becomes y, it seems superfluous to make separate mention of the latter in the rule. The commentator apparently feels this objection, and ventures for once a defense, as follows: ūṣmaṇo grahaṇāt siddhe punargrahaṇena kim : nityatvaṃ na syāt : r̥tũr utsr̥jate vaśī; ‘when the matter is made certain by the use of the term ūṣman, why any farther mention? It is because this does not apply to all cases, as is shown by the instance r̥tũr utsr̥jate vaśī.’ I do not see the point of this defense: it does, indeed explain the mention of r in the rule, but it has nothing to do with that of y.” CA 2.1.29 (ऋतूँरुत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम्) requires the obligatory change of an n into an r in the listed examples. Thus, in this case, r is not covered by the term ūṣman, and hence its separate mention is necessary. How about y? Whitney says, an n must first change to a visarjanīya before it becomes y. If such is the case, then why is it mentioned again? I think the explanation given by the commentator applies more aptly to the case of y, though his example only illustrates the case of r. In an example like rathān iva, the final n first changes to a visarjanīya by CA (2.1.27: आकारोपधस्योपबद्धादीनां स्वरे). Then the

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 210 visarjanīya is changed to y by CA (2.2.2: स्वरे यकारः). Finally, by CA (2.1.21: स्वराद्यवयोः पदान्तयोः), this y is deleted. The commentator assumes the following dilemma. One could apply CA (1.3.6) at the stage rathāḥ iva and change this to rathā̃ḥ iva, with the assumption that the vowel ā is followed by ḥ, an ūṣman. However, if one chose not to do so, and change ḥ first to y, then, in the stage rathāy iva, one may not be able to nasalize ā without a distinct mention of y. In part, this brings up the question of whether a substitute can be treated as being a functional equivalent of the original (sthānivadbhāva). The fact that the rule separately mentions y may be taken as an indication that the CA implicitly had a doctrine of sthānivadbhāva (cf. P.1.1.56 स्थानिवदादेशोऽनल्विधौ), where the restriction analvidhau ‘not in operations dependent on the specific sound’ would have prevented the substitute y from being attributed the phonological properties of the ḥ it replaced. The reading found in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary, however, is परोष्मापत्तौ च, and it has been interpreted in a substantially different manner by this commentary. The significant thing to note is that this reading is not unique to Bhārgava-Bhāskara, but is supported by a number of other manuscripts, i.e. E, F, G, I, J (corr), O. This includes the entire Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa tradition. In spite of the manuscript support, I do not believe that this is the original reading. भा.भा.वृत्ति - (परोष्मापत्तौ च) नकारमकारयोः परतः ऊष्मण आपत्तौ नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः । सम् सुट् । ‘सँस्कृ॑तः’ (अ.वे. २०.५३.३)। ‘सँशि॑तम्’ (अ.वे. ३.१९.१)। अपदान्ते । ‘हँसः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १६.२३.१)। ‘अँशः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.२)। ‘दृँह॑’ (अ.वे. ६.१३६.२)। ‘तपूँ॑षि’ (अ.वे. २.१२.६)। ‘सिँ॒हः’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.१)। Note: Vishva Bandhu’s Grammatical Word-Index to Atharvaveda, p. 671, lists ŚAV (11.6.21) for an instance of haṃsaḥ. The verse does not con- tain haṃsaḥ, but aṃhasaḥ, and its inclusion is a simple error which should be corrected. १.३.७. अनुनासिकस्य च पूर्वेणैकादेशे । Whitney (1.69). G: 1.3.7. P: °णैकादशे.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका211 Translation: Also, when a nasalized [vowel] combined with a preceding [non-nasal] vowel is replaced by a single substitute, [that single substitute becomes nasalized]. Note: The existence of a rule such as this may be an indication that a doctrine similar to Pāṇini’s rule P. 1.1.50 (स्थानेऽन्तरतमः) is not fully developed in the CA tradition. Pāṇini’s procedure requires that a substitute should be maximally similar in phonetic features to the original it replaced. Such a gene- ric convention obviates the need for further specialized rules like CA (1.3.7). Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary correctly says that the author of the CA feared that, without such a special rule, the combined result of a nasal and a non-nasal vowel would be a non-nasal [lit. śuddha ‘pure’] vowel. The exam- ple illustrates how Pāṇini was working with a more refined and comprehensive phonological apparatus as compared with that of the CA. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनुनासिकस्य पूर्वेण सह एकादेशे कृते अनुनासिको भवति । ‘उ॒भावु॑पाँ॒शु प्र॑थ॒मा पि॑बाव’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.७)। ‘सोम॑स्याँशो (N: शवो)’(अ.वे. ७.८१. ३)। ‘ये व्री॒हयो॒ यवा॑ निरु॒प्यन्ते॒ ँऽशवः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१४)। Note: Regarding the last example quoted by the commentary, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 540) points out: “The Anukr. requires -yante aṃś- to be read, although the passage is quoted under Prāt. 1.69 (= CA 1.3.8) as an example of the elision of initial a with the transfer of its nasalization to the eliding e.” The mss. in this case follow the CA prescription, and it is diffi- cult to see why there is not a single ms. which follows the Anukramaṇī. भा.भा.वृत्ति - एकादेशे अनुनासिकस्य शुद्धः स्वरः स्यादि- त्याशङ्क्य पुनरनुनासिकादेशो विधीयते । ‘उपऽअँशुः’ (not in AV)। ‘उपाँशुः’ (not in AV, ‘उ॒पाँ॒शु,’ अ.वे. ४.३२.७)। ‘पुष्टो ँऽशः’ (not in AV)। ‘साराँशः’ (not in AV)। १.३.८. पुरुष आ बभूवाँ३ इत्यवसाने । Whitney (1.70), C, Hb, N, O: do not have ३. E, F: use ऽ for ३. G: 1.3.8.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 212 Translation: In the passage puruṣa ā babhūvā̃3 (AV 10.2. 28), [the final vowel of the word babhūva is replaced by a protracted nasalized vowel] before the pause. Note: The expression avasāne is used to restrict this change only to the pre-pausal environment. Therefore, this change does not take place when babhūva is combined with iti in the Parihāra which is part of the Krama recitation. It is not immediately clear whether the rule says anything about what happens in the Saṃhitā, or applies only negatively in the Krama recitation. Whitney seems to prefer almost a negative interpretation: “The pada text reads simply puruṣaḥ : ā : babhūvā̃3 : and there would be no call for such a rule as that given here, but for the requirements of the krama text, in which babhūva as the last word in a verse, must suffer parihāra (iv.117 = CA 4.4.18), or repetition with iti interposed, and in which it might be made a question whether the nasality of the vowel should or should not be preserved before iti. This rule teaches us that the nasal quality is lost before the iti.” I believe Whitney’s interpretation is too indirect. The straight forward interpretation is that the final vowel of the expression पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भू॒व becomes [prolonged, and] nasalized, before a pause. The fact that it remains non-nasal before iti is an indirect consequence. By mentioning the whole sequence पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भवाँ३, the CA indicates that this change occurs only in this sequence, and not in every case of babhūva. Whitney’s dilemma arises because of the fact that the Padapāṭha already has babhūvā̃3, and hence such a rule is not needed either for the Pada text or the Saṃhitā. However, the CA may not always be proceeding from the Pada form to Saṃhitā form, but occasionally it seems to proceed from the normal form, e.g. babhūva to both the Pada and Saṃhitā forms. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पुरुष आ बभूवाँ इत्यवसानेऽनुनासिको भवति । ‘पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भू॒वाँ[३]’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। अव- सान इति किमर्थम् । ‘बभूवेति बभूवाँ[३]’। भा.भा.वृत्ति - बभूवशब्दः लिट्प्रथमैकवचनान्तः अवसानेऽ- र्धर्चविरामे टेः प्लुतत्वेन प्लुत[ः] । ‘अणोऽप्रगृह्यस्य’ (पा. ८.४.५७) इति पाणिनीयेनानुनासिक उक्तः । स तु ‘पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भू॒वाँ३’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। पदद्वयपूर्व[ः] बभूव-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका213 शब्दः। अवसाने एव प्लुतानुनासिकः । ‘पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भवाँ३’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। नान्यत्र । ‘बभूवाँ३’ इति शब्दः प्रका- रार्थः । तेन वेदान्तरे । ‘न त्वा॒ भीरि॑व विन्दती३ँ’ । ऋग्वेदे (ऋ.वे. १०.१४६.१)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara assumes that the word babhūvā̃3 is cited to refer to the a class of similar examples, and thus the rule also accounts for similar examples in RV. Or perhaps he means: itiśabdaḥ prakārārthaḥ. In any case, he wishes to extend the scope of this rule beyond its intention. This indicates that the late commentators on the Prātiśākhyas were under the generalizing influence of systems like that of Pāṇini. The rule is originally in- tended to apply only to the word babhūva as it occurs in the specified context, and not to any other instance, let alone to other examples in texts like the RV. १.३.९. ऋवर्णस्य रेफात्परं यत् । Whitney (1.71). G: 1.3.9. Translation: [In becoming nasalized], for r̥ vowels [= ∂r∂], the [vocalic] part following r [becomes nasal, i.e. ∂r∂̐]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऋवर्णस्य अनुनासिकस्य रेफात्परं यत् तदनुनासिकं भवति । ‘भूमिदृ॒ँहमच्यु॑तं पारयि॒ष्णु’ (अ.वे. ५. २८.१४)। ‘दृँह॑ प्र॒त्नान्’ (अ.वे. ६.१३६.२)। ‘जना॑न् दृ॒ँह- न्त॒म्’ (अ.वे. १२.२.९)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - ऋवर्णस्य मध्ये यो रेफः तस्मात्परस्य स्वर- भागस्यानुनासिकः स्यात् । नॄन् ….. ‘नॄँᳲ प्रणेता’ (‘नॄँᳲ प्र- णेत्रम्,’ ऋग्वेदखिलानि, VSM edn. of the RV, Vol. 4, प्रैषाध्याय, पृ. ९८३, ऋक्प्रातिशाख्य ४.७८)। Note: Commenting upon this rule, Whitney says: “Here we learn that, when such a vowel is nasalized, the nasal quality does not affect the r, but only the part of a vowel which follows it. Anyone may perceive, however, upon

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 214 trying the experiment, that there is no physical difficulty in the way of nasalizing the r itself.” Whitney clearly disregards the fact that the entire tradi- tion of Sanskrit grammar and phonetics is united in declaring that there is no nasal counterpart for r, as indeed there are for y, v, and l. Thus, there was no question of nasalizing the r element. However, it was a legitimate question whether the first vocalic element which precedes the r also becomes nasal. The question becomes all the more necessary, since, in passages like ऋ॒तूँरुत्सृ॑जते (AV 6.36.2), the consonant r is preceded by a nasal vowel. An explanation of why the latter vocalic fraction becomes lengthened or is nasalized, and not the previous one, may be found in the fact that the vowel r̥ was pronounced in most of the historical period as either ri or ru, and in these pronunciations, the preceeding vocalic fraction almost went unrepresented, and the following vocalic fraction was given a more distinct form. From the present rule, one can infer that the pronunciation of r̥ known to the CA was closer to ri or ru, and hence the only vowel which could be lengthened or nasalized was the vowel following the consonantal r. This is also known indirectly from earlier evidence; i.e., dreśya, see: Wackernagel, I. 31. १.३.१०. उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य । Whitney (1.72). G combines this with the next rule and numbers it 1.3.10. Translation: The u as a monophonic [morpheme] is nasal- ized before the word iti [in the Padapāṭha]. Note: The term apr̥kta literally means ‘uncombined.’ However, P.1.2.41 (अपृक्त एकाल्प्रत्ययः) defines it as referring to an affix that consists of a single sound. In the usage of the CA (1.3.10, 1.3.17, and 4.4.14), it refers to particles which consist of a single vowel. Cf. TPR (1.54) and VPR (1.151). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उकारस्य इतौ परतः अपृक्तस्य अनु- नासिको भवति। ऊँ इति । भा.भा.वृत्ति - (उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य दीर्घः प्रगृह्यश्च) अपृक्तस्य उकारस्य प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा दीर्घता च । अनुनासिकानु- वर्तनादनुनासिकत्वं च अवैदिके इतौ परे । ‘शमु’ (अ.वे.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका215 १.६.४)। ‘शम् । ऊँ इत्यूँ’ । तथा च ऋक्प्रातिशाख्ये शौनकः । ‘रक्तोऽपृक्तो द्राघितः शाकलेन’ (ऋग्वेदप्राति- शाख्य १.७५) इति । तैत्तिरीयादौ तु पदकाले उ इत्येव प्रयुञ्जन्ति । रञ्जनं दीर्घतां च न कुर्वन्ति । Note: Whitney says: “In the pada- text of the Atharvan, as in those of the other Vedas, the particle u is always written ũ iti.” Bhārgava-Bhāskara on the other hand informs us that this practice is not followed by some schools like the Taittirīyas. This is supported by the printed text of the Padapāṭha of the TS (e.g. 1.1.4, VSM edn, Vol.I., Pt.I., p 71). १.३.११. दीर्घः प्रगृह्यश्च । Whitney (1.73). E, F: omit the Visarga. G combines this with the preceding. I: 16. Translation: [The monophonic particle u, before the word iti in the Padapāṭha] is also lengthened and is treated as a pra- gr̥hya [i.e. is not combined in sandhi with the following iti]. Note: Whitney starts out by saying, “Any satisfactory reason why the particle u should be treated in this peculiar manner by the framers of the pada- text is not readily apparent,” but comes up with the most likely explanation: “It seems as if the protraction must have been made in order to give the word more substance as an independent pada in the disjoined text, it being the only in- stance of a single short vowel possessing such a value; and as if the nasaliza- tion and addition of iti were intended to mark it more distinctly as an excep- tional case, requiring a different treatment in the saṃhitā-text. Pāṇini (i.1.17, 18) allows it to be read either u or ūn̐.” Also see the MB on P.1.1.17 for problems involved in interpreting Pāṇini’s rules. As Bhārgava-Bhāskara notes on the previous rule, the Padapāṭha of the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā does not show lengthening, nasalization, or the addition of the word iti to u. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घश्च भवति प्रगृह्यश्च । ‘ऊँ इति’ । भा.भा.वृत्ति - See the previous rule.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 216 १.३.१२. ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे । Whitney (1.74). C, Hb, N: omit च. Hb, Nb: इ for ई. G: 1.3.11. Translation: [Word-final] ī and ū, when the formation has a locative sense, are also treated as pragr̥hya [i.e. are not com- bined in sandhi with the following vowel, e.g. i of iti added after a pragr̥hya word in the Padapāṭha]. Note: The significance of this rule, and the rules which follow, lies in that they offer us some insight into the fact that the Padapāṭha occasionally gives indications of a syntactic-semantic understanding of the words of the Saṃhitā. Generally speaking, the Prātiśākhyas do not concern themselves with matters of syntax, except when such syntactic/semantic matters are explicitly reflected in the Padapāṭha. Another curious fact may also be noted. The CA rule, as well as Pāṇini (1.1.19: ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे), treat forms like āṣṭrī and urvī as being in the sense of a locative (saptamy-arthe), rather than being irregular Vedic locative forms. It is clear that these forms are viewed by the Padapāṭha as being exceptional forms. Perhaps, after noticing the absence or deletion of the normal locative affix, there was a certain hesitation to categorize them clearly as locatives (saptamī), though it was clear that the forms had a locative meaning. Also see: MB on P.1.1.19. As Whitney notes, in all these instances, these forms are given as pragr̥hyas in the Padapāṭha, followed by iti. However, that by itself does not tell us whether the author of the Padapāṭha intended these forms to be duals, or forms in the locative sense. In any case, the commentators seem to be in fur- ther disarray. On RV (9.12.3), both Venkaṭamādhava and Sāyaṇa paraphrase the form gaurī with gauryām, and Sāyaṇa says: गौर्यामधि । अधीति सप्तम्यर्थानुवादः. The AV examples, on the other hand, have been treated rather in an inconsis- tent way by [Pseudo]Sāyaṇa. The form āṣṭrī (AV 6.27.3) is simply para- phrased with the locative āṣṭryāṃ. The form tanū (AV 4.25.5) is actually treated as a locative form, with the locative affix deleted: तन्वाम् । ‘सुपां सुलुक्’ (पा.७.१.३९) इति सप्तम्या लुक् । ‘ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे’ (पा.१.१.१९) इति प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा. On the other hand, the form urvī (AV 18.1.32) is taken as an accusative dual and is paraphrased with urvyau. Even though this does not understand the word in the locative sense, it at least accounts for why the word is treated as a pragr̥hya in the Padapāṭha. Finally, the form mahī (AV 18.1.39) is taken either as an irregular accusative singular (महतीमित्यर्थः । अमः स्थाने सुः), or it is construed with vātāḥ in the same verse (अथ वा महीत्युत्तरत्र वाता इत्यनेन सम्बध्यते). In either

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका217 case, the explanations do not account for why the word should be treated as a pragr̥hya by the Padapāṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे प्रगृह्यौ भवतः । ‘आ॒ष्ट्री प॒दं कृ॑णुते अग्नि॒धाने॑’ (अ.वे. ६.२७.३)। (पद ∀) ‘आ॒ष्ट्री इति॑’ । ‘अतो॑ जा॒तासो॑ धारयन्त उ॒र्वी’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३२)। (पद ∀) ‘उ॒र्वी इति॑’ । ‘म॒ही नो॒ वाताः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३९)। (पद ∀) ‘म॒ही इति॑’। ‘त॒नू दक्ष॒मा सु॑वताम्’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.५)। (पद ∀) ‘त॒नू इति॑’। सप्तम्यर्थ इति किमर्थम् । ‘धी॒ती वा॒ ये’ (अ.वे. ७.१.१)। ‘तस्या॒मू सर्वा॒’ (अ.वे. १३.४.२८)। Note: The CAB cites all the same examples as found under APR (63), though in this case the examples occur in a slightly different order. One should also note that the CA rule is identical in wording with APR (63). This means that at least for these two texts, the forms concerned are all in the sense of the locative case. Also note the reading अा॒ष्ट्र्यां प॒दम् … found in RV (10.165.3) which proves the equivalence of āṣṭrī and āṣṭryām. भा.भा.वृत्ति - प्रगृह्यश्चेत्यनुवर्तते सूत्रदशकपर्यन्तम् । सप्त- म्यर्थे पर्यवसन्नं यत् ईकारान्तमूकारान्तं च पदं प्रगृह्यसंज्ञं स्यात् । प्रगृह्यसंज्ञायाः प्रयोजनं स्वरे परे विवृत्तसन्धिः । अत एव पदकाले प्रगृह्यपदस्य इतिकरणं भवति । (पदपाठ ∀) ‘त॒नू इति॑ । दक्ष॑म् । आ । सु॒व॒ता॒म् । सु॒ऽशेव॑म् ।’ (संहिता ∀) ‘त॒नू दक्ष॒मा सु॑वतां सु॒शेव॑म्’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.५)। प्रातिशाख्ये ऋग्वेदे । ‘सोमो॑ गाै॒री अधि॑ श्रि॒तः’ (ऋ.वे. ९.१२.३)। Note: The example from the RV is cited by Uvaṭa in his commentary on RPR (2.52: स्वरेषु चार्ष्याम्). It would seem that Bhārgava-Bhāskara is here referring to Uvaṭa’s commentary on the RPR.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 218 १.३.१३. द्विवचनान्तौ । Whitney (1.75). G: 1.3.12. Translation: [The vowels ī and ū] occurring as finals of dual forms [are also called pragr̥hya]. Note: The words which are designated as pragr̥hya by this rule are followed by iti in the Padapāṭha, and are not combined in sandhi with the fol- lowing vowels either in the Saṃhitā or in the Padapāṭha. While for all the AV examples for the previous rule, the absence of sandhi can be illustrated only for Padapāṭha citations, that is not the case for the examples of the present rule. Here, in a number of cases listed by the CAB, the lack of sandhi is manifest in the Saṃhitā as well. Another curious feature may also be noted. By using dual forms īkāro- kārau in the previous rule, and dvivacanāntau in the present rule, the CA, at least on the face of it, seems to be designating these sounds, rather than the words ending in these sounds, by the term pragr̥hya. Interestingly, in this case, Pāṇini seems to be somewhat inconsistent. P.1.1.19 (ईदूतौ च सप्तम्यर्थे) resem- bles CA (1.3.12: ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे). On the other hand, P.1.1.11 (इदूदेद् द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यम्) contrasts with CA (1.3.13: द्विवचनान्तौ). In this case, Pāṇini seems to treat the whole words as pragr̥hyas, while the CA seems to be explic- itly referring to the final vowels alone. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्विवचनान्तौ च ईकारोकारौ प्रगृह्यौ भवतः । ‘केन॒ पार्ष्णी॒ आभृ॑ते॒’ (अ.वे. १०.२.१)। (पद ∀) ‘पार्ष्णी॒ इति॑’ । ‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू उ॒भौ’ (अ.वे. ३.२०.६)। (पद ∀) ‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू इति॑’ । ‘उ॒भावि॑न्द्रा॒ग्नी आभ॑रताम्’ (अ.वे. ५.७.६)। (पद ∀) ‘इ॒न्द्रा॒ग्नी इति॑’ । भा.भा.वृत्ति - द्विवचनस्यान्ते यावीकारोकारौ प्रगृह्यसंज्ञौ स्तः । विवृत्तसन्धिः ‘द्यावा॑पृथि॒वी इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१. ४)। ‘बा॒हू इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२.५)। ‘इ॒न्द्रा॒ग्नी इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३५.४)। ‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३. २०.६)। ‘अह॑नी॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.३)। ‘अ॒ग्नी

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका219 इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.५.११, VVRI edn., ११.७.११)। ‘रोद॑सी॒ इति॑’ (पद, १.३२.३)। ‘द्यावा॑पृथि॒वी इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१.४) १.३.१४. एकारश्च । Whitney (1.76). A, B, D: °स्य for °श्च. G: 1.3.13. Translation: [The sound] e [occurring as the final of a dual form] is also [called pragr̥hya]. Note: In contrast with CA (1.3.13-14), Pāṇini combines all three types of duals ending in ī, ū, and e, under a single rule: P.1.1.11 (ईदूदेद् द्विवचनं प्रगृह्यम्). For further contrast, see Note on the previous rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकारश्च द्विवचनान्तः प्रगृह्यो भवति । ‘अत्रा॑ दधेते’ (अ.वे. ५.१.३)। (पद ∀) ‘द॒धे॒ते॒ इति॑’ । ‘रोध॑चक्रे वावृ॒धेते॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१.५)। (पद ∀) ‘वा॒वृ॒धेते॒ इति॑’ । ‘सं पि॑तरा॒वृत्वि॑ये’ (अ.वे. १४.२.३७)। (पद ∀) ‘ऋत्वि॑ये॒ इति॑’ । भा.भा.वृत्ति - द्विवचनान्ते यस्त्वेकारः स प्रगृह्यः स्यात् । अविशेषात् सुबन्तं तिङन्तं च द्विवचनं गृह्यते । ‘शी॒र्ष॒ऽ- क॒पा॒ले इति॑ शी॒र्ष॒ऽक॒पा॒ले’ (पद, अ.वे. १५.१८.४)। ‘नासि॑के॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १५.१८.४)। ‘द्वे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.२८)। ‘रू॒पे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.२८)। ‘नाना॑रूपे॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.३)। ‘अ॒हो॒रा॒त्रे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.७.६)। ‘वसा॑ने॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.३. ११)। ‘इ॒मे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.३१.४)। ‘श्रि॒ते इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.१.३७)। ‘ई॒जा॒ते॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३. १.४७)। मंत्रे । ‘ये [इति॑ । …?] ते इति॑’ (?, पद, अ.वे. ४.२६.१)।

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 220 Note: The last example quoted by Bhārgava-Bhāskara is somewhat unclear. AV (4.16.6) has the passage beginning with ye te. However, the words ye and te in this instance are not dual forms. They are nominative plurals agreeing with pāśāḥ. The commentator must have intended dual forms, as they occur in AV (4.26.1). However, here they do not occur consecutively. Also, these forms are nowhere followed by iti in the mantra (= saṃhitā), but only in the Padapāṭha for AV (4.26.1). Thus, it is not clear why Bhārgava- Bhāskara would cite this example prefixed with the word mantre. १.३.१५. अस्मे युष्मे त्वे मे इति चोदात्तः । Whitney (1.77), P: °त्ताः. D, J, M, P(corr): Daṇḍa after अस्मे, युष्मे, त्वे, and मे. G: 1.3.14. Translation: Also [the] high-pitch [sound e occurring at the end of the forms] asmé, yuṣmé, tvé, and mé. Note: Whitney points out: “The specification ‘when accented’ is, of course, meant only for the two latter of the words named, as the others would never occur otherwise than accented. Of the four, yuṣmé and mé never occur in the Atharvan text.” Compare the wording of the verse cited in the CAB with the wording of APR (59, p. 53): एकारो विभक्त्यादेशश्छन्दसीति. Also note that the examples listed under APR (59) cover only tve and asme. Since those are the only forms occurring in the ŚAV, one can clearly relate the APR with the Śaunakīya tradition. On the other hand, Surya Kanta (Atharva-Prāti- śākhya, Introduction, p. 39) says that the forms yuṣmé and mé do not occur in the Vulgate of the AV, but suggests that they may have occurred in a genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV. There is a great deal of confusion of readings in the mss. of the AV, and Whitney points out: “tvé is found once, in a Rik passage (AV. v.2.3 = RV. x.120.3), and also, according to the manuscripts, in viii.9.9, twice re- peated, and each time written in the pada-text tvé iti, as a pragr̥hya: but the ac- cent and the addition of iti are hardly to be regarded otherwise than as a blunder of the tradition, since the word is evidently the enclitic or accentless tva of the Vedic language: no forms of this enclitic pronoun are found elsewhere in the Atharvan. The fourth, asmé, is also hardly an Atharvan word. It is found in three Rik passages, viz. iv.21.1 (RV. vi.28.1), xviii.1.3 (RV. x.10.3), 42 (RV. x.17.8) : in another passage (iv.31.3), where the Rik (x.84.3) reads asmé, all the Atharvan manuscripts have asmai, which has been altered to asmé in the edition, in obedience to the requirement of the sense, and the authority of the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका221 Rik reading. Another precisely similar case is xix.40.4 (RV. i.46.6). The only passage where the Atharvan gives asmé independently is v.1.3, where all the manuscripts except P. and M. (copies of the same original, by the same scribe) agree in reading it (pada asmé iti) : here also, however, the edition reads as- mai.” In contrast with Whitney’s views, it should be born in mind that the APR (59) deals with tvé and asmé examples, and therefore the inclusion of asmé forms under pragr̥hyas was clearly acceptable to both the CA and the APR. The APR lists AV (8.9.9) as a case of accented tvé. In AV (4.21.1), (18.1.3), (18.1.42), and (5.1.3), the APR reads asmé, and its non-inclusion of AV (4.31.3) suggests that it had the reading asmai. In all these listed cases, the Padapāṭha clearly treats these forms as pragr̥hyas, and adds iti after them. Thus, it is most likely that Whitney’s choice of readings in these cases is not only against the mss. of the AV, but also against the authority of the Pada- pāṭha, and the APR, which was indeed not known to him. The KV on P.1.1.13 (शे ) claims that the only Vedic example of one of these pragr̥hyas listed in this rule being followed by a vowel in the Saṃhitā- pāṭha is RV (4.49.4): अ॒स्मे इ॑न्द्राबृहस्पती. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अस्मे युष्मे त्वे मे इति उदात्तः प्रगृह्यो भवति । ‘अ॒स्मे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२१.१)। ‘यु॒ष्मे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे.पै.सं. ९.४.९)। ‘त्वे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२. ३)। ‘मे इति॑’ (पद, वा.सं. ४.२२)। ‘निगमे युष्मदस्मद्भ्यां विभक्तेरेत्वमिष्यते ।’ (source?) युष्माकम् अस्माकम् त्वम् अहम् इति प्राप्ते अस्मे युष्मे त्वे मे इति च विभक्तयादेशः क्रियते । भा.भा.वृत्ति - सर्वाविभक्तिकशेप्रत्ययान्तानि चत्वारि पदानि प्रगृह्याणि स्युः । उदात्तग्रहणमस्मदादेशस्य अनुदात्तस्य ‘मे॒’ एतच्छब्दस्य व्यावृत्त्यर्थम् । किञ्च सर्वनामसंज्ञस्य अनुदात्तस्य ‘त्वे॒’ एतत्पदस्य प्रथमाबहुवचनान्तव्यावृत्त्यर्थः एकारः उदा- त्तः प्रगृह्यश्चेत्यर्थः । ‘अ॒स्मे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२१.१)।

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 222 ‘यु॒ष्मे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे.पै.सं. ९.४.९)। ‘त्वे इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२.३)। १.३.१६. अमी बहुवचनम् । Whitney (1.78). G: 1.3.15. Translation: [The word] amī, when it is a plural form, [is also pragr̥hya]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य- अमी बहुवचनं प्रगृह्यं भवति । ‘अ॒मी ये युध॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.१०३.३)। (पद ∀) ‘अ॒मी इति॑’ । ‘अ॒मी ये विव्र॑ताः॒’ (अ.वे. ३.८.५)। (पद ∀) ‘अ॒मी इति॑’ । ‘अमी अशश्रे’ (not attested in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘अ॒मी इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.८.५)। बहुवचनमिति किमर्थम् । ‘शम्यत्र’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: The example amī aśaśre (not āśaśre as cited by Surya Kanta) cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. M.A. Mehendale, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Insti- tute, Pune, suggests in a personal exchange that if the form aśaśre is read as āśaśre, this could possibly be an irregular past perfect 3rd plural form of ā-!śā (śiśāti), similar to the form duhre. In any case, no such form is attested in any known Vedic text. The form śaśre by itself is attested several times in the AV as a perfect form in the singular (e.g. AV 4.8.6; 5.31.11). This form is derived by Sāyaṇa from the root śr̥, śr̥ṇāti. The counter-example śamyatra cited by the CAB suggests that the commentator took the expression amī in the rule as not referring to the form amī, but as referring any expression ending in the sequence amī. Such an in- terpretation is strengthened by the addition of the condition bahuvacanam in the rule. Whitney says that the counter-example śamy atra is plainly a fabrication of the commentator. The same counter-example is also given in the KV on P.1.1.12 (अदसो मात्), though for a different reason.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका223 Referring to the addition of the condition bahuvacanam, Whitney says: “nor can I find that the text contains anything which should render that addition necessary. The Vāj. Pr. says (i.98) ‘amī, when a word by itself;’ the other treatises (R. Pr. i.19, r. 19, r. 73, lxxiv; Taitt. Pr. iv. 12) see no reason for ap- pending any such limitations.” A possible reason for the inclusion of such a condition may be that the dividing line between phonology and morphology could not be clearly conveyed, and hence the author of the CA suspected that a mere enunciation of the sequence amī could possibly overextend to those cases where the sequence amī occurred, but not as an independent word. To avert such a presumed over-extension, the condition bahuvacanam was added. भा.भा.वृत्ति - अदःशब्दस्य अमू इत्यस्य द्विवचनान्तत्वेन प्रगृह्यता सिद्धा । ईदन्तत्वेऽपि बहुवचनान्तत्वादप्राप्तविधिरा- रभ्यते । ‘अ॒मी इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.१३)। अमी इति सूत्रारम्भादेव सिद्धे बहुवचनमिति किमर्थम् । श्रोतव्यम् । अमधातोः (‘अम गतौ,’ पा. धातुपाठ, ४६५; ‘अम रोगे,’ पा. धातुपाठ, १७२०) ‘सर्वधातुभ्य इन्’ (‘इन्,’ उणा- दिसूत्र १.४६ दशपादी, ४.१२६ पञ्चपादी)। ‘कृदिकाराद- क्तिनः’ (गणसूत्र, बह्वादिगण, पाणिनीयगणपाठ. Also: काशिका on P.4.1.45) इति ङ्यन्तोऽमीशब्द उत्पद्यते । ‘हल्ङ्याब्भ्यः …’(पा. ६.१.६८) इति सोर्लोपः । एवंभूतस्य प्रगृह्यसंज्ञा मा भूदित्येतदर्थं बहुवचनग्रहणम् । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara makes a desperate attempt to prove the necessity of the qualification bahuvacanam in the rule by showing that there can be another expression amī derived from the root am, which is a feminine nominative singular of a stem in long ī. The qualification bahuvacanam is in- tended to prevent the application of this rule to such an instance. No such ex- pression is attested in Sanskrit usage, and it is purely a theoretical creation of the commentator. The CAB provides a better counter-example in this respect, i.e. śamī+atra. This counter-example is also found in the KV on P.1.1.12. १.३.१७. निपातोऽपृक्तोऽनाकारः । Whitney (1.79). G: 1.3.16.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 224 Translation: A monophonic particle, except ā, is also pra- gr̥hya. Note: P.1.1.41 (अपृक्त एकाल्प्रत्ययः) defines the term apr̥kta as applying to a monophonic affixal element. Since a nipāta ‘particle’ is not an affixal ele- ment, the term apr̥kta could not be used for a monophonic particle in Pāṇini’s system. Thus, he was forced to formulate his rule differently, cf. P.1.1.14 (निपात एकाजनाङ्). However, the CA use of the term apr̥kta is not constrained by such a limitation, and hence it could be used to qualify a particle. While practically, all the elements qualified by the term apr̥kta in the CA are particles consisting of a single vowel, it is not clear whether one should translate the term as ‘consisting of an uncombined vowel,’ as done by Whitney. Whitney clearly perceives that the particle o illustrated by the examples cited in the CAB is ‘composed of ā and u.’ This is made explicit by Bhārgava- Bhāskara. However, it would seem to me that the author of the Padapāṭha and the author of the CA probably did not treat it that way, but perceived it as a single particle, which needed a separate treatment. Whitney, however, does have a point: “The form of this rule is not a little strange : why o should thus be made an exception from the next rule, and why, when there is no other particle, except ā, composed of a single vowel, it should be treated as if one of a class, it is very difficult to see : we cannot help suspecting here the influence of the general grammar : compare Pāṇ. i.1.14, the virtual correspondence of which with our rule is as close as possible.” It seems clear that Pāṇini had a larger class of monophonic particles in his mind. Bhārgava-Bhāskara cites such Pāṇinian examples, which are, of course, not at- tested in the text of the AV. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - निपातः अपृक्तः अनाकारः प्रगृह्यो भवति । ‘ओ चि॒त् सखा॑यम्’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१)। (पद ∀) ‘ओ इति॑’ । ‘श्रा॒तं ह॒विरो षु॑’ (अ.वे. ७.७२.२)। (पद ∀) ‘ओ इति॑’ । अनाकार इति किमर्थम् । ‘पुन॒रेहि॑ वाचस्पते’ (अ.वे. १.१.२)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - अपृक्त एक एव स्वरः निपातसंज्ञश्चेत्प्रगृह्यः स्यात् । न त्वाङ् । ‘इ इन्द्रः’ । ‘उ उमेशः’ । ‘ए अनन्त’। ‘आ एवमस्ति किम्’ । अनाङ् किम् । ‘आऽअ॑क्ता’ ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका225 ‘आक्ता॑’ (अ.वे. १०.१.२५)। ‘आ । इहि’ । ‘एहि’ (अ.वे. १.१.२)। आङः उञा योगे एकवद् वृत्तौ ‘ओ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.१)। अयं प्रगृह्य एव उञा योगात् । अपृक्तः किर्म् । ‘इ॒म्’ (अ.वे. ४.३०.४)। ‘स्म॒’ (अ.वे. १.८.२)। ‘च॒’ (अ.वे. १.२.४)। ‘मा’ (अ.वे. १.१.४)। ‘वि’ (अ.वे. १.१.४)। ‘तु’ (अ.वे. ४.१८.६)। ‘हे’ (not in AV)। ‘है’ (अ.वे. ६.५०.२)। ‘नेत्’ (ऋ.वे. ७.८६.६)। ‘इत्’ (अ. वे. १.२.४)। इत्यादि । Note: Compare the terminology used by the CAB and the commen- tary of Bhārgava-Bhāskara. While the first uses the sūtra term anākāraḥ, the latter replaces it with anāṅ, a usage from Pāṇini (1.1.14: निपात एकाजनाङ्). It also replaces the term ukāra of CA 1.3.11-12 with the Pāṇinian term uñ, cf. P.1.1.17-18 (उञः, ऊँ). This shows how Bhārgava-Bhāskara is fully utilizing, and taking for granted, the terminology of the Pāṇinian grammar. By offering examples, which are not specifically Atharvan, and which are commonplace in Pāṇinian commentaries, he is in effect offering a Pāṇinian interpretation of this Prātiśākhya. The examples इ इन्द्रः and उ उमेशः are found in the Siddhānta- Kaumudī on P.1.1.14 (निपात एकाजनाङ्). We also find there the instances आ एवं नु मन्यसे and आ एवं किल तत्. १.३.१८. ओकारान्तश्च । Whitney (1.80). G: 1.3.17. Translation: Also [a polyphonic particle] ending in o [is pragr̥hya]. Note: Whitney raises an important concern regarding the notion of a particle ending in o as understood in this rule: “This is a strangely inaccurate description: it was bad enough to have the upasarga or preposition ā treated as a nipāta by the last rule, when combined with u : but here we have nouns, verbs, prepositions, and particles all confounded together under the same name. … In the form of the rule is perhaps to be seen again the influence of the gen- eral grammar : compare Pāṇ. i.1.14.” What Whitney fails to point out is that in all these cases, the final o is arrived at by a combination of a word with the

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 226 following particle u, and yet this combination is treated by the Padapāṭha as an indivisible combination, making the combined form a nipātānta, if not strictly a nipāta, cf. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary. One also needs to comment on Whitney’s statement: “it was bad enough to have the upasarga or preposition ā treated as a nipāta by the last rule.” This statement assumes that nipāta and upasarga refer to exclusive classes. Such an impression could have been created perhaps by the statement in the Nirukta (1.12) which lists nāma, ākhyāta, upasarga, and nipāta as four classes of words. However, this is clearly not the only treatment of these two categories. Pāṇini (1.4.56, 58, 59) considers upasarga and nipāta as overlap- ping categories, with the latter subsuming the former, cf. गत्युपसर्गकर्मप्रवचनीय- संज्ञाभिः सह निपातसंज्ञा समाविशति, KV on P.1.4.56 (प्राग्रीश्वरान्निपाताः). Also see: प्राग्वचनं क्रियते निपातसंज्ञाया अनिवृत्तिर्यथा स्यात् । अक्रियमाणे हि प्राग्वचनेऽनवकाशा गत्यु- पसर्गकर्मप्रवचनीयसंज्ञा निपातसंज्ञां बाधेरन् । ता मा बाधिषतेति प्राग्वचनं क्रियते । अथ क्रिय- माणेऽपि प्राग्वचने यावतानवकाशा एताः संज्ञाः कस्मादेव न बाधन्ते । क्रियमाणे हि प्राग्वचने सत्यां निपातसंज्ञायामेता अवयवसंज्ञा आरभ्यन्ते तत्र वचनात्समावेशो भवति ।, MB on P.1.4.56. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ओकारान्तश्च निपातः प्रगृह्यो भवति । ‘दो॒षो गा॑य’ (अ.वे. ६.१.१)। (पद ∀) ‘दो॒षो इति॑’ । ‘अ॒ङ्गो न्व॑र्यमन्’ (अ. वे. ६.६०.२)। (पद ∀) ‘अ॒ङ्गो इति॑’ । ‘अ॒त्तो ह॒वीँषि॒’ (अ.वे. १८.३.४४)। (पद ∀) ‘अ॒त्तो इति॑’ । ‘द॒त्तो अ॒स्मभ्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. १८.३.१४)। (पद ∀) ‘द॒त्तो इति॑’ । भा.भा.वृत्ति - अवर्णान्तं पदम् उञा निपातेन योगे ओका- रान्तं नित्यसंहितं पदमुत्पद्यते । सः शब्दः ओकारान्तः निपातान्त इत्यर्थः [।] प्रगृह्यसंज्ञः स्यात् । ‘नो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३२.१। ‘चो॒ इति॑’ (पद, ऋ.वे. ५.२९.१३)। ‘सो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे.पै.सं. १७.२३.४)। ‘प्रो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. २०.९५.२)। ‘क्वो॑ इति॑’ (पद, ऋ.वे. १.३८.३)। ‘अथो॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१४.२)। ‘उ॒तो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१६.३)। ‘तत्र॒ो इति॑’ (पद, ऋ.वे. ८.५६.४)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका227 ‘अर्यमो इति’ (not found in known Vedic texts)। आख्यातं पदमपि । ‘अ॒त्तो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.४४)। ‘वि॒द्मो इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२.१)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara quotes many more examples as compared to the CAB. However, Whitney provides a comprehensive listing: “The parti- cles, it is true, greatly preponderate in number and in frequency : thus we have atho (about 130 times in the whole Atharvan text), mo (15 times), no (12 times), uto (7 times), and iho, yado, aṅgo, evo, doṣo (once each); but of prepositions we have o and upo (twice each), and pro (once); of verbs, vidmo, datto, atto (once each); and of nouns (pronouns), teno (twice), yo and so (once each).” Bhārgava-Bhāskara lists additional non-AV forms. १.३.१९. आमन्त्रितं चेतावनार्षे । Whitney (1.81). G: 1.3.18. Ha, Na: °र्थे for °र्षे. Translation: A vocative form, [ending in o], is also [pra- gr̥hya], before an iti which is not a part of the Saṃhitā text [lit. which does not come from the ancient seers who ‘saw’ the Vedic saṃhitās]. Note: The present CA rule corresponds to P.1.1.16 (सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्ये- तावनार्षे), where this doctrine is ascribed to Śākalya. The rule raises some inter- esting questions and Whitney has brought out some of these: “The vocatives in o, from themes in u, are not in a single instance treated as pragr̥hyas in the saṃhitā of the Atharvan, but are always euphonically combined with the fol- lowing vowel. In the pada-text, however, they are invariably written as if they were pragr̥hyas, with the usual iti annexed. The object of this rule, then, is to teach that they are exempt from euphonic combination only in the pada-text, while in other situations they are to be treated according to the general euphonic rules.” This sounds good enough. The CAB, raising the question इताविति किमर्थम्, says that before words other than iti, the vocative forms in o are not pragr̥hyas. On the other hand, Bhārgava-Bhāskara raises the question anārṣe iti kim. This is answered by pointing out that before an iti of the saṃhitā-text, the vocative in o is not treated as a pragr̥hya. Of course the example he offers is not from the Atharvan text, but it is a Vedic example nonetheless.

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 228 Whitney questions: “This whole state of things is something very peculiar. Why, when the o of vāyo is really no more exempt from change than the e of agne, should it be regarded by all the pada-texts as a pragr̥hya, causing so much trouble to the different treatises to explain its treatment?” This may possibly suggest dialect differences among the Padakāras, see Cardona (1991). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आमन्त्रितं च ओ(H, N: ॐ)कारान्त- मितौ परतः अनार्षे प्रगृह्यं भवति । ‘त्वय्युदि॑ते॒ प्रेर॑ते चित्र- भानो’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.३)। (पद ∀) ‘चि॒त्र॒भा॒नो॒ इति॑’। ‘यु॒वं वा॑यो सवि॒ता’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.३)। (पद ∀) ‘वा॒यो॒ इति॑’ । ‘मन्यो॑ वज्रिन्’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.६)। (पद ∀) ‘मन्यो॒ इति॑’ । इताविति किमर्थम् । ‘वा॒य॒ ऊ॒तये॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.६)। ‘म॒न्य॒ ई॒डि॒ता’ (अ.वे. ४.३१.४)। ‘बभ्र॒ आ मे॑ शृणु॒त’ (अ.वे. ५.१३.५)। Note: The CAB, under the query इताविति किमर्थम्, cites the first 3 ex- amples out of a list of six found in the APR (143). भा.भा.वृत्ति - ऋषिर्वेदः । सर्वज्ञानहेतुत्वात् । तत्रत्यः आर्षः अनार्षस्तु यो वेदोक्तादन्यः । अनार्षे इतिशब्दे परे ओकारान्तमामन्त्रितं प्रगृह्यं स्यात्। ‘वा॒यो॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२५.३)। ‘वि॒ष्णो॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.२६.३)। ‘सनो॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.२४)। ‘यो इति’ (G: य हो) (पद, अ.वे. ११.४.९)। इतौ किम् । ‘वा॒य॒ उ॒द॒केन’ (अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘वाय॒वा या॑हि’ (ऋ.वे. ५.५१.५)। ‘वाय॒विन्द्र॑श्च’ (ऋ.वे. १.२.५)। ‘म॒न्य॒ ई॒डि॒ता(G: तः)’ (अ.वे. ४.३१.४)। (पद ∀) ‘मन्यो इति’ । ‘वष॑ट् ते विष्णवा॒स आ’ (ऋ.वे. ५.९९.७)। अनार्षे किम् । ‘ब्रह्म- बन्धवित्यब्रवीत्’ (‘एता गा ब्रह्मबन्ध इत्यब्रवीत्,’ काण्व.शु. य.सं. १०.६)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका229 Note: The example ब्रह्मबन्धवित्यब्रवीत् is cited in the KV on P.1.1.16 (सम्बुद्धौ शाकल्यस्येतावनार्षे). Note that while Pāṇini ascribes this view to Śākalya, it is cited here without any such comment, and is the only available procedure. १.३.२०. आर्त्नी इवादिष्विवादितिपरः । Whitney (1.82): °दितिः परः. G: 1.3.19. I: 20. Translation: In [passages such as] ārtnī iva (AV 1.1.3), [in the pada-text], the word iti follows [the word iva, rather than the strictly pragr̥hya word ārtnī etc.]. Note: The peculiarity of this formation needs to be clearly under- stood. The Vedic exegetical tradition almost unanimously agrees that the word iva is compounded with the preceding word. Given this notion, how should one deal with forms like ārtnī before iva? Here, Bhārgava-Bhāskara states clearly that there is no sandhi between such pragr̥hya words as ārtnī with the following iva, i.e. there is a pragr̥hya inside a compound expression. How- ever, the pada-text marks the pragr̥hya character by adding an iti after the com- pound expression ending in iva. Whitney points out that the pada-text of the AV actually reads ārtnī ivety ārtnī ’iva, but the commentary CAB records only the first portion ārtnī iveti, and leaves out the repetition of the compound. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य

आर्त्नी इवादिषु इवात् इतिपरो भवति । ‘आर्त्न॑ी इ॒वेति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१.३)। ‘घ॒र्म॒दुघे॑ इ॒वेति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२२.४)। ‘नृ॒पती॑ इ॒वेति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.४. ६)। ‘य॒मे इ॒वेति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.३८)। Note: All the examples cited by the CAB occur under APR (58, ex- amples 45-47, p. 52). Surya Kanta informs us that the example AV (8.4.6) occurs only in the mss. Vn. However, the fact that it also appears in the CAB makes it almost certain that it is part of the genuine APR text, because of the close correspondence between the examples cited in the CAB and the APR. भा.भा.वृत्ति - आर्त्नी इवादिषूदाहरणेषु अन्तःपदं प्रगृह्यता- स्ति । तत्र इवशब्दस्य परत्वादेव इतिशब्दपरत्वं ज्ञेयम् ।

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 230 अयं । इतिशब्दः स्वरादिः विवृत्तसन्धिनिदर्शनाय पद- काले प्रयुज्यते [।] यत्र इवशब्देन विवृत्तसन्धिः स्फुटः तत्र इतिकारस्य प्रयोजनं नास्ति [।] अतः अवग्रहानन्तरमिति- कारो न प्रयुज्यते [।] तैत्तिरीया(G: र्या)दौ तु इवशब्दः पद- काले विगृह्यते तत्र प्रगृह्यस्य इतिकरणमुचितमेव । Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara draws our attention to the fact that the pada-text of the TS does not follow this pattern, i.e. it adds the word iti directly after the pragr̥hya word, and not after the word iva. This is illustrated, for in- stance, by the example वाससी इव (TS 1.5.10). Here, the dual word vāsasī is a pragr̥hya and is followed by the word iva in the Saṃhitā. However, the Pada- text goes: वास॑सी॒ इति॑ । इ॒व॒. In view of the example from the TS, and its dis- tinctive practice mentioned by Bhārgava-Bhāskara, we need to modify Whitney’s belief that the doctrine enunciated by the present rule was “adopted by all the pada-texts.” १.३.२१. अनुनासिकोऽन्तःपदे ह्रस्वः । Whitney (1.83). G: 1.3.20. Most mss. read rhasvaḥ. Translation: A nasal [vowel] occurring in the interior of a word [i.e. in the non-final position] is [as a general rule] short. Note: Whitney thinks that the doctrine taught by this rule and its ex- ceptions does not enter into the proper province of a Prātiśākhya. However, he commends Uvaṭa on the RPR who “is at much pains to explain its introduction into the Prātiśākhya, into whose proper province such a matter does not enter.” Whitney then explains the “little inconsistencies and redundancies of this kind, which are exhibited by all the treatises; they aid in the general purpose of a Prātiśākhya, which is to preserve the traditional text of the school from corrup- tion.” Whitney’s discussion has a built-in circularity, though I do not disagree with his final conclusion. It must be pointed out again that this treatise does not distinguish between anusvāra and anunāsika. Therefore, the point of the rule is not to say that such a vowel as discussed here is a nasal vowel, instead of being a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. The point of the discussion is that it is a short vowel. However, note that according to this text, cf. CA (1.2.13: अनुनासिकं च),

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका231 every nasal vowel is metrically treated as a heavy (guru) vowel / syllable. This removes the possible metrical difference between a short nasal vowel, and a short pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनुनासिकः अन्तःपदे ह्रस्वो भवति । ‘द्वे च॑ मे विँश॒तिश्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.२)। ‘ति॒स्रश्च॑ मे त्रिँ॒श- च्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.३)। ‘चत॑स्रश्च मे चत्वारिँ॒शच्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.४)। ‘पुमा॑न् पुँ॒सः’ (अ.वे. ३.६.१)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - अन्तःपदे पदस्य मध्ये योऽनुनासिकः स ह्रस्व एवेति ज्ञातव्यः । ‘अँशः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.२)। ‘अ॒ँशुः’ (अ.वे. ५.२९.१२)। ‘हँसः’ (not in ŚAV, अ.वे.पै.सं. १६.२३. १)। ‘सं॒पिँ॒षन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. १४.१.३)। ‘वँशः’ (‘वँ॒श॒,’ अ.वे. ३.१२.६)। ‘शिँशपा’ (शिँशपाः, अ.वे. २०.१२९.७)। ‘शिँशुमारः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. २०.५८.६; ‘शिँशुमाराः,’ अ.वे. ११.२.२५)। ‘सिँ॒हः’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.१)। १.३.२२. दीर्घो नपुंसकबहुवचने । Whitney (1.84). G: 1.3.21. Translation: [The nasal vowel occurring] in neuter plural forms is long. Note: This is an exception to the previous rule, which stipulated that nasal vowels, in general, are short. Again it should be kept in mind that the CA does not differentiate between a nasal vowel and a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति नपुंसकबहु- वचने । ‘परू॑ ँषि॒ यस्य॑ संभा॒राः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१)। ‘यज्ँाू॑षि॒ होत्रा॑ ब्रू(H, N: क्र)मः’(अ.वे. ११.६.१४)। ‘अ॒त्तो ह॒वी ँषि॒’ (अ.वे. १८.३.४४)।

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 232 भा.भा.वृत्ति

नपुंसकलिङ्गस्य प्रथमाद्वितीययोर्बहुवचने योऽनु- नासिकः स दीर्घो ज्ञेयः । ‘यशाँसि’ (not in AV)। ‘ज्योती॑

ँषि’ (अ.वे. ९.५.८)। ‘वपूँ

॑षि’ (अ.वे. ५.१.२)।
१.३.२३. पांसुमांसादीनाम् ।
Whitney (1.85). E (orig), F, G: पाँशुमाँसा°. G and F (corr) add उ at the
beginning of the rule. G: 1.3.22. O: पांशु°.
Translation: [Also, the nasal vowels] of the words pāṃsu
(= pā̃su), māṃsa (= mā̃sa) etc. [are long].
Note: The mss. do not consistently distinguish between a nasal vowel
from an anusvāra, nor does the CA make any clear distinction. Thus, as
before, the main point of this rule is that these nasal vowels are long, and not to
contrast between a nasal vowel versus a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra.
चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पाँसुमाँस इत्येवमादीनां दीर्घः अनुना-
सिको भवति। ‘पाँ॒सू(H, N: सु)न॒क्षेभ्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.१०९.
२)। ‘माँ॒सं माँ॒सेन॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१२.४)। ‘शाँ॒श॒पेन॑(H: °यत)’
(अ.वे. ६.१२९.१)। ‘शि॒ला भूमि॒रश्मा॑ पाँ॒सुः’ (अ.वे. १२.
१.२६)।
Note: Concerning the reading śāṃśayena for AV (6.129.1),
Whitney’s note on this rule hesitantly asks us to correct the form to śāṃśapena: “should be śāṃśapena? the manuscripts blunder somewhat over the word, but W.E. and H. read distinctly śāṃśapena.” This hesitation is gone in his note to the translation of this verse (AV Transl. Vol.I., p.378): “The mss. blunder over the word śāṃśapéna. SPP. reports only śāṃśaphéna as variant (read by two of his); ours have that, and also śāṃsayéna and sāṃśayéna; our text reads wrongly śāṃśayéna #correct to śāṃśapéna∃.” The VVRI edition finally chooses śāṃśapéna, and I have followed that reading. However, the mss. of the CAB probably intended -yena. This is also the reading of the APR (p. 150).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका233 भा.भा.वृत्ति

(उपाँशुमाँसादीनाम्) उपाँश्वादीनामेकादेशतां प्राप्तानामनुनासिकानां माँसादिशब्दानां च योऽनुनासिकस्तस्य च दीर्घतास्तीति ज्ञातव्यम् । ‘उपऽअँशु’ । ‘उपाँशु’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.७)। ‘अमृताँशुः’ (not in AV)। ‘माँ॒सम्’ (अ.वे. ४. १२.४)। ‘काँस्य’ (not in AV)। ‘पाँ॒सून्’ (अ.वे. ७.१०९. २) । ‘पाँ॒सु॒रे’ (अ.वे. ७.२६.४)। Note: The two commentaries show that they seriously commented on two different readings. It would seem that an original reading pā̃su was first corrupted to pā̃śu, and then a few manuscripts further changed it to upā̃śu. These two readings are restricted to those manuscripts which call the CA either Caturādhyāyī-Vyākaraṇa, or Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa, and thus share a common branching. १.३.२४. हनिगम्योः सनि । Whitney (1.86). C, Hb, J, Nab, P: °सनिः. Ha: °सतिः. G: 1.3.23. Translation: [The nasal vowel is long also] in the desidera- tive forms of the roots han and gam [lit. the nasal vowel of the roots han and gam, when followed by the desiderative af- fix san, is long]. Note: One needs to assume that when there is a reduplication of the root, the first occurrence is treated as the reduplication, while the second occurrence is treated as the original root. As Whitney notes, there is no desiderative form of gam found in the present text of the AV, unless we decide to amend य॒दा स्थाम॒ जिघँा॑सति (AV 12.4.29-30) to जिगांसति on the basis of the present rule. No manuscript of the AV supports this emendation. However, note that Bhārgava-Bhāskara seems to cite the form jigā̃sati, besides jighā̃sati. In all probability, this is simply to illustrate the two roots given in the rule, and need not truly suggest that the text of the AV as known to Bhārgava-Bhāskara had the form jigā̃sati. Secondly, it is interesting to note the use of san in this text where the n is identical with the metalinguistic marker n in Pāṇini’s desiderative affix san. The CA simply takes this marker for granted, and does not define its function

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 234 as Pāṇini does, cf. P.6.4.16 (अज्झनगमां सनि). This may possibly indicate a post- Pāṇinian layer in the CA, but one cannot be certain. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) suggests that the currently available Vulgate of the AV is not a genuinely Śaunakīya version, and that a genuinely Śaunakīya AV may have contained the desiderative of gam. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - हनि गमि इत्येतयोः सनि परतः दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘जिघँा॑सति’ (अ.वे. ४.१८.३)। ‘य॒दा स्थाम॒ जिघँा॑ (Whitney’s emendation: गां)सति’ (अ.वे. १२. ४.२९-३०)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - हनिगमिधात्वोः सन्प्रत्यये परे योऽनुनासिकः स दीर्घः स्यात् । ‘जिघाँस-’ (‘जिघँा॑सति,’ अ.वे. ४.१८. ३)। ‘जिगाँ(G: गां)स-’ (?‘य॒दा स्थाम॒ जिघँा॑[Whitney’s emendation: गां]सति,’ अ.वे. १२.४.२९-३०)। १.३.२५. शान्मान्दानाम् । Whitney (1.87). G: 1.3.24. Translation: [Also, the nasal vowel in the desiderative forms of the roots] śān, mān, and dān [is long]. Note: Of the three listed roots, only the forms of mān occur in the available text of the ŚAV. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) suggests that desiderative forms of śān and dān may have actually occurred in a genu- inely Śaunakīya recension of the AV, which the currently available Vulgate is not. Whitney points out that P.3.1.6 (मान्बधदान्शान्भ्यो दीर्घश्चाभ्यासस्य) also groups these three roots together, besides the root badh, and suggests that a similar occasional urge to indulge in the provisions for a general grammar of Sanskrit may account for several rules in the CA. Whitney’s suggestion does have some merit, and that one need not posit, like Surya Kanta, the existence of a so- called true Śaunakīya recension of the AV which supposedly contained all these untraceable forms.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका235 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य

शान् मान् दानाम् इत्येतेषां सनि परत(ः) दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘शीशाँसति’ (not in AV)। ‘मीमँा॑समानाः’ (अ.वे. ९.१.३)। ‘दीदाँसति’ (not in AV)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - शान् । मान् । दान् । एषां धातूनां सनि अनुनासिको दीर्घ एव ज्ञेयः । ‘शीशाँस-’ (not in AV)। ‘मीमाँ(G: मां)समानस्य’ (अ.वे. ९.६.२४, VVRI edn.: ९.७.७)। ‘दीदाँस-’ (not in AV)। १.३.२६. वस्वन्तस्य पञ्चपद्याम् । Whitney (1.88). A, B (orig): वस्यंत°. Hb, Nb: वस्वतस्यं°. G: 1.3.25. Translation: [Also, the nasal vowel appearing] in the first five case forms [i.e. nominative sg., du., and pl., and accusative sg. and du.] of [a nominal stem] ending in [the perfect participial affix] vasU [is long]. Note: The inclusion of the nominative singular form in this rule is somewhat intriguing, because such a form ends in n, e.g. pareyivān, and has neither a nasal vowel, nor a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. Perhaps, the author of the rule has in his view examples like śuśruvā̃ (< śuśruvān) found in RV (10.71.5d). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वस्वन्तस्य पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘परेयिवाँसः’ (‘प॒रे॒यि॒वाँस॑म्,’ अ.वे. १८.१.४९)। ‘प्रविशिवाँसः’ (‘प्र॒वि॒शि॒वाँस॑म्,’ अ.वे. ४.२३.१)। ‘उ॒त्त- ॒स्थि॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.९३.१)। ‘प॒पि॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.९७. ३)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - क्वसुप्रत्ययान्तस्य पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घोऽनुनासिको ज्ञेयः । प्रथमाया वचनत्रयं द्वितीयाया द्वयं पञ्चपदी । ‘जागृ-

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 236 वान्’ (not in AV)। ‘जागृवाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘ज॒क्षि॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.९७.३)। ‘प॒पि॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.९७.३)। ‘प॒रे॒यि॒- वाँस॑म्’ (अ.वे. १८.१.४९)। ‘उ॒त्त॒स्थि॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ६. ९३.१)। ‘सा॒स॒ह्वाँस॑म्’ (अ.वे. २०.४६.१)। क्वचिन्न । ‘दा॒श्वांस॑म्’ (अ.वे. ७.४०.२)। Note: The last comment of Bhārgava-Bhāskara is somewhat intrigu- ing. What does he mean in saying that this long nasal vowel does not occur in some instances? His example दा॒श्वांस॑म् might make sense perhaps if we assume that he makes a distinction between forms which have a nasal vowel versus those which have a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. Such a distinction is not assumed by the rules of the CA, and the mss. of the AV do not show any such distinction. If Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s comment is taken seriously, it may suggest changes which occurred in certain oral traditions. The CA rule itself uses the expression vasu for the affix vas. The final u must be a marker sound, as the same marker is found in Pāṇini. Pāṇini adds one more marker, making the affix vas appear as KvasU, cf. P.3.2.107 (क्वसुश्च). Bhārgava-Bhāskara uses the expression KvasU, even though the CA uses only vasU, thus indicating an advanced degree of Pāṇinianization of this tradition. १.३.२७. ईयसश्च । Whitney (1.89). A, Hb, Nbc, O: इ for ई. A, B, D: °शश्च for °सश्च. G: 1.3.27, comes after विदेश्च. Translation: [Also, the nasal vowel appearing in the first five case forms i.e. nominative sg., du., and pl., and accusa- tive sg. and du.] of [a nominal stem] ending in [the compara- tive affix] īyas [is long]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ईयसश्च पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘श्रेयान्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १७.३४.६)। ‘श्रेयाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘श्रेयाँसः’ (not in AV)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका237 Note: Whitney says the only form of the stem श्रेयस्, relevant in the present context, occurring in the ŚAV is श्रेय॑ांसम् (15.10.2). This form also oc- curs in AV (2.11.1-5). भा.भा.वृत्ति - ईयसुन्प्रत्ययान्तस्य च पञ्चपद्यामनुनासिको दीर्घः बोद्धव्यः। ‘भूयँा॑सः’ (अ.वे. ७.६०.७, VVRI edn.: ७.६२.७)। ‘तीक्ष्णी॑याँसः’ (अ.वे. ३.१९.४)। ‘सही॑याँसम्’ (अ.वे. १७.१.१-५)। Note: Again notice that the CA and the CAB refer to the affix as īyas, but Bhārgava-Bhāskara uses the Pāṇinian term īyasUN. This is an indication of an advanced stage of Pāṇinianization of this tradition. १.३.२८. विदेश्च । Whitney (1.90). G: 1.3.26. O: विदेश्चः. G, I: comes before ईयसश्च. I: ईयसश्च२ विदेश्च१. Translation: Also, [the nasal vowel appearing in the first five case forms i.e. nominative sg., du., and pl., and accusa- tive sg. and du.] of the root vid [ending in the perfect parti- cipial affix vasU is long]. Note: As Whitney notes, Pāṇini treats the formation vid+vas as an exceptional case of a present participle, cf. P.7.1.36 (विदेः शतुर्वसुः), where the perfect participle affix vas is used for a present participle. Whitney raises two appropriate objections: “There are two damaging objections to be made to this rule : in the first place, it ought to be brought in, if at all, after rule 88 (= CA 1.3.26), in order that vasvantasya as well as pañcapadyām may be implied in it by inference from its predecessor; and in the second place, there is no need of any such precept at all, since there is no good reason why vidvān, the word to which it alone applies, should not be considered a vasvanta, and therefore re- garded as disposed of by rule 88.” Whitney’s concern about rule ordering was apparently felt by a few copyists as well, and therefore we have two manu- scripts, G and I, which invert the order of CA 1.3.27-28, and place this rule immediately after CA 1.3.26 (= W 1.88). Unfortunately, the manuscript evi- dence is overwhelmingly against this inversion. No manuscript omits this rule either. Just looking at the textual evidence, one must say that the author of the

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 238 CA could not lump the forms of vidvas together with the perfect participle forms like those of pareyivas, and in this separation he had reasons similar to Pāṇini’s. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विदेश्च पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘वि॒द्वान्’ (अ.वे. २.१.२)। ‘विद्वाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘वि॒द्वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.११५.१)। ‘वि॒द्वाँस॑म्’ (अ.वे. १५.२.१)। ‘विद्वाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘विद्वान् स व्रात्यः’ (‘वि॒द्वाँसं॒ व्रात्य॑म्,’ अ.वे. १५.२.१)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - ‘विदेः शतुर्वसुः’ (पा. ७.१.३६) इति वस्वन्तस्य । चात् मत्वर्थे वसुः । तदन्तस्य च पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घोऽनुनासिकः । ‘वि॒द्वान्’ (अ.वे. २.१.२)। ‘विद्वाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘वि॒द्वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.११५.१)। ‘वि॒द्वाँस॑म्’ (अ.वे. १५.२.१)। ‘भ॒क्ति॒वाँसः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७९.३)। Note: Bhārgava-Bhāskara tries to extend this rule beyond the forms of vid, by overinterpreting ca to mean that the rule applies to other cases of vas, such as the affix vas as a possessive affix. This is done in order to account for the form भ॒क्ति॒वाँसः॑ (AV 6.79.3). It is not clear if this form could be taken care of by CA (1.3.26). But, then, the forms of vidvas can as well be taken care of by that rule. १.३.२९. पुंसश्च । Whitney (1.91). E, F, G: पुँ°. G: 1.3.28. I: 29. Translation: Also, [the nasal vowel appearing in the first five case forms i.e. nominative sg., du., and pl., and accusa- tive sg. and du.] of the word puṃs [= pũs is long]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पुंसश्च पञ्चपद्यां दीर्घः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘पुमा॑न्’ (अ.वे. १.८.१)। ‘पुमाँसौ’ (not in AV)। ‘पुमाँसः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ५.२१.४)। ‘पुमँा॑सम्’ (अ.वे. ३.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका239 २३.३)। ‘पुमाँसौ’ (not in AV)। पञ्चपद्यामिति किमर्थम् । ‘पु॒ँसि वै रेतो॑ भवति’ (अ.वे ६.११.२)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - पञ्चपद्यां पुंशब्दस्यानुनासिकः चात् तद्धिते परेऽपि दीर्घश्च ह्रस्वश्च । ‘पुमा॑न्’ (अ.वे. १.८.१)। ‘पुमाँ- सौ’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुमाँसः’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. ५.२१.४)। ‘पुमँा॑सम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२३.३)। तद्धिते । ‘पौँस्न्यम्’ (‘पौँस्य॑म्,’ अ.वे. २०.७३.६) । ‘पौँस्नः’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुँस्त्वम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुँस्ता’ (not in Vedic texts)। पञ्चपद्यां किम् । ‘पुँ॒सः’ (अ.वे. ३.६.१)। ‘पु॒ँसि’ (अ.वे. ६.११.२)। ‘पुँ॒सु’ (अ.वे. १२.१.२५)। स्पर्शे । ‘पुँभिः’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: Both the commentaries raise the question: why have the con- dition pañcapadyām? The simple answer is that the rule should not apply beyond the five forms referred to by pañcapadī, i.e. the first five forms of the nominal paradigm. Again, we must keep in mind that the intended contrast between the forms pumā̃sam and pũsi is only as regards the length of the nasal vowel, and not that one form is with a nasal vowel, while the other should be with a pure vowel followed by an anusvāra. Such a distinction is not made by this text, and it is only our orthography which forces us to be over-specific. Also, Bhārgava-Bhāskara over-interprets this rule to extend it to cases of taddhita formations like paũsnya. This word is attested in AV (20.73.6) and was possibly not in the AV as known to the author of the CA. Whitney has made a justifiable argument that the CA is familiar with only the first 18 books of the ŚAV, and that the last two books are a later addition. इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः । H, N: प्रथमस्य तृतीयपादः । C, E, F: प्रथमस्य तृतीयः पादः । A, B, D, J, M, P: ।३। तृतीयः पादः । G: इत्यथर्ववेदांगकौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गवभास्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य तृतीयपादसूत्रव्याख्यानं संपूर्णं । H, N: add number 91 to indicate the cumulative number of rules in the first three Pādas of the first Adhyāya. O: ॥३॥ सूत्राणि ॥२९॥ प्रथमस्य तृतीयः पादः॥

अध्याय १, पाद ३ 240 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य- प्रथमस्य तृतीयः पादः । ९१। भा.भा.वृत्ति - इत्यथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गवभा- स्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य तृतीयपादसूत्रव्याख्यानं संपूर्णम् । _________________________________

॥ प्रथमोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ चतुर्थः पादः ॥ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अथाथर्ववेदाङ्गकौत्सव्याकरणस्य भार्गव- भास्करीयवृत्तौ प्रथमाध्यायस्य चतुर्थपादस्थसूत्रगणव्याख्यान- मारभ्यते । ॐ३म् । १.४.१. वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा । Whitney (1.92). G: 1.4.1. Translation: The sound which precedes the final sound [i.e. the penultimate sound] is termed upadhā. Note: Whitney points out that this definition of upadhā is ‘precisely the same’ as the definition in the VPR (i.35), but further says: “In the Rik Pr. the word has a more general use, as ‘preceding letter or word’ (upa-dhā, ‘a setting against or next to’): it is probably on account of this less restricted signification current in some schools that the two treatises first spoken of deem it necessary to limit the term by a specific definition.” Also see Renou (1942: 395-6). P.1.1.65 (अलोऽन्त्यात् पूर्व उपधा) is also identical with the present CA rule. One may speculate that Pāṇini’s wording is based on something similar to the wording of the CA, in that the masculine form pūrvaḥ in Pāṇini’s rule seems to have the assumed masculine qualificand varṇa (= aL). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्वो वर्णः उपधासंज्ञो भवति । ‘नाम्युपधस्य रेफः’ (च.आ. २.२.३)। ‘अग्निरत्र’ (not in AV)। ‘वायुरत्र’ (not in AV)। ‘आकारोपधस्य लोपः’ (च.आ. २.२.१६)। ‘अश्वा॑ भवथ’ (अ.वे. १.४.४)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - अन्त्याद्वर्णात्पूर्वो वर्ण उपधासंज्ञो बोध्यः [।] अकारोपधान्मकारोपधान्मतोर्मस्य वत्वमित्यादिविधिषु उप- धासंज्ञायाः प्रयोजनं ज्ञेयम् । सरः, ‘सर॑स्वती’ (अ.वे.

242अध्याय १, पाद ४ ५.२३. १)[।] लक्ष्मी[ः], ‘लक्ष्मीवान्’ (not in known Vedic literature)। [भगम्], ‘भग॑वन्तः’ (अ.वे. ३.१६.४)। Note: The difference between these two commentaries is noteworthy. In order to show the purpose of the technical term upadhā defined here, the CAB cites two rules from the CA which make use of this term. On the other hand, Bhārgava-Bhāskara alludes to P.8.2.9 (मादुपधायाश्च मतोर्वोऽयवादिभ्यः) which uses this same term. However, this rule teaches where the possessive affix -matUP changes to -vatUP. There is no such rule in the CA. To say that the Prātiśākhya defines the term upadhā so that it may used in rules similar to P.8.2.9 is absurd. However, this only goes to show how the Pāṇinian tradition has been internalized by this commentator, so that he almost fails to recognize that the CA is not part of this tradition. The examples अग्निरत्र and वायुरत्र provided by the CAB are found in the KV on P.8.2.66 (ससजुषो रुः). १.४.२. स्वरोऽक्षरम् । Whitney (1.93). G: 1.4.2. Translation: A vowel is called a syllable. Note: Whitney comments: “The precise scope of this rule it is not easy to determine; it seems to be rather a general and theoretic doctrine than a precept which enters in any active and practical manner into the system of rules of our treatise. … We may perhaps regard our rule as a virtual precept that the accentuation, which in later rules (iii.55 = CA 3.3.1 etc.) is taught especially to the vowels, extends its sway over the whole syllable : or, on the other hand, that the accents, which in rules 14-16 (= CA 1.1.16) above were declared to belong to syllables, affect especially the vowels. With the subject of accent the commentator seems, at any rate, to bring it into special connection.” Addition- ally, one may perhaps connect this rule with the metrical notion of syllable, where the number of syllables is basically identical with the number of vowels. The term akṣara in the sense of a metrical syllable is historically attested all the way from the oldest stratum of the Vedic literature. Also cf. VPR (1.99). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरः अक्षरसंज्ञं भवति । ‘किमक्षरस्य स्वर्यमाणस्य स्वर्यते । अर्धं ह्रस्वस्य पादो दीर्घस्येत्येके ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका243 सर्वमिति शाङ्खमित्रिः(H: त्रः)। अक्षरस्यैषा विधा न (H: धानं, N: विधानं, Whitney: विधान) विद्यते यद् द्विस्वरीभावः (H, N: यद् यद् विरस्वराभावः, Whitney: विश्वरीभावः)’ (च.आ. ३.३.३१-३४)। स्वरमक्षरमित्याहुः स्वरादन्यद् व्यञ्जनं सर्वं पृथक् वर्णसामान्यं

द्व्यक्तांव्यंज्यते

बुधैः (?)। Note: The CAB here quotes CA 3.3.31-34 to illustrate the use of the term akṣara just as it has quoted two CA rules on the previous sūtra to illustrate the term upadhā. These rules were not admitted by Whitney as being part of the text of the CA. All the manuscripts contain these rules, and now it is clear that even the CAB, the oldest commentary on this text, admits them as sūtras belonging to the CA. At the same time, it is a puzzle as to why the CAB does not directly comment on these rules. Whitney, who treated the cited passages as belonging to the commen- tary, rather than to the text of the CA, yet offered a translation, ‘though not without some misgivings,’: “what part of a circumflexed syllable is circum- flexed? Some say, half a short one, quarter of a long one : Śāṅkhamitri says, the whole : here is found no rule for a syllable [hrasva and dīrgha are said of vowels only, see note to r. 51 above]; since, in each case, the vowel alone is contemplated [??] : now the vowel is declared to be the syllable.” Whitney notes that his manuscript has the reading शाङ्खमित्रः in this place, though else- where (CA 2.1.6 and 3.3.30) the reading is शाङ्खमित्रिः, and hence in his transla- tion, he selects the latter. This choice is now supported by the second manu- script, N. Given the confirmed reading अक्षरस्यैषा, the next unclear portion can be confidently reconstructed as विधा न विद्यते, यद् द्विस्वरीभावः, and can be translated as: “It is not the norm of a syllable to have two accents [within one and the same syllable].” This seems be the continuation of Śāṅkhamitri’s doctrine that the whole, and not part of a syllable, is circumflexed. Also for some reason, Whitney says about the commentary: “Omitting his usual explanatory paraphrase (a small loss : it would doubtless have been svaro ’kṣaram bhavati), he proceeds at once to give an exposition, of which a part occurs again at the close of the third section of the third chapter.” This is inaccurate. Both the manuscripts of the commentary CAB contain the initial phrase: स्वरः अक्षरसंज्ञं भवति. This paraphrase is also found in the lone manu- script H, which was available to Whitney, but for some reason, he missed it while reading or copying it.

244अध्याय १, पाद ४ भा.भा.वृत्ति - अश्नुते वाग्जालं व्याप्नोति अक्षरं मध्योदा- त्तम्। ‘क्षरः सर्वाणि भूतानि कूटस्थोऽक्षर उच्यते’ (भगवद्गी- ता १५.१६) इत्यादिषु नञ्समासोत्पन्नः आद्युदात्तः अक्षरः । आकाशादौ मध्योदात्तमक्षरम् । स्वरः ह्रस्वो वा दीर्घो वा प्लुतो वा अक्षरसंज्ञो ज्ञेयः । अ आ इ ई उ ऊ ऋ ॠ ऌ ए ऐ ओ औ एतान्यक्षराणि । व्यञ्जनानि परस्य स्वरस्याङ्गा- नि इत्युक्तं पूर्वमेव (cf. ‘परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि,’ च.आ. १.२.१५)। च, स्म, स्फ्य, सा, ग्ना, नि, त्रि, धी, स्त्री, तु, क्षु, भू, भ्रू, नृ, ते, द्वे, वै, त्वै, नो, प्रो, तौ, स्वौ एतान्य- प्यक्षराणि । पद्याः पूर्वाङ्गमित्युक्तत्वात् (cf. ‘पद्यं च,’ च.आ. १.२.१७) तत् षट् … (break in the Ms) Note: By referring to the derivation of the word akṣara from the verb aśnute, the commentator probably alludes to Patañjali’s MB: अक्षरं न क्षरं विद्यात् अश्नोतेर्वा सरोऽक्षरम्। अश्नोतेर्वा पुनरयमौणादिकः सरन्प्रत्ययः । अश्नुते इत्यक्षरम्, (cf. MB, Kielhorn edn., Vol. I., p. 36). This verse has been partially cited also by the CAB. १.४.३. सोष्मणि पूर्वस्यानूष्मा । Whitney (1.94), C (orig), P: नु for नू. A, B, D, E, F, Ha, J, M, Na, O, P: Daṇḍa after सोष्मणि, and join the rest with the next rule. J, M: °पूर्वस्यानूष्मण. Ha, Na: Daṇḍa after पूर्वस्यानूष्मा. J, D: सोष्मणिं°. I: single rule: सोष्मणि पूर्वस्या- नूष्मांतर्येण वृत्तिः. Translation: Before an aspirated stop, the preceding [aspirated stop] is replaced by a non-aspirate [stop]. Note: As Whitney correctly points out: “The proper application of this rule, within the sphere of the Prātiśākhya, is only to cases of the doubling of the first or second consonants of a group, by the varṇakrama, as taught in rules iii.26 (= CA 3.2.1) etc., yet its form of statement is general, and there can be no doubt that it should apply to all cases arising in the course of derivation and inflection, and that forms such as mr̥ḍhḍhi, containing a double lingual so- nant aspirate, are strictly excluded by it.” Whitney then points out that such

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका245 double aspirates occur in all manuscripts of Vedic texts, and he gives a list of occurrences in the text of the AV. He corrected all of these in accordance with the precept taught in the present rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सोष्मणि परतः पूर्वस्यानूष्मा, सोष्म(H, N: ष्मा)णः अनूष्मा भवति । ‘इ॒[द्?]ध्मम्’ (अ.वे. १०.६. ३५; H: इंधं; Whitney: इद्धम् as in ‘समि॑द्धम्,’ अ.वे. ७.७४. ४)। ‘दु॒ग्धम्’ (अ.वे. १०.६.३१)। ‘न॒न्वा रु॑रुध्रे(द्ध्रे?)’ (अ.वे. ४.३१.३)। ‘यो द॒ध्रे(द्ध्रे?)’ (अ.वे. १८.३.६३)। ‘व॒ल॒गं (H: वल्गं) वा॑ निच॒ख्नुः(क्ख्नुः?)’ (अ.वे. १०.१. १८)। प्रथमाश्च द्वितीयानां संयोगे प्रत्यनन्तरा(?, Whitney’s emendation: रम्) । तृतीयाश्च चतुर्थानामेतत्सर्वत्र लक्षणम् ॥ (Source?) Note: The manuscripts of the AV generally do not show the forms iddhmam, ruruddhre, daddhre, nicakkhnuḥ. We find only the forms idhmam rurudhre, dadhre, and nicakhnuḥ. Thus, it would seem that while the doctrines laid down in the CA refer to oral traditions, the orthography of the manuscripts of the AV reflects a choice of not carrying out these doublings. Even the manuscripts of the commentaries on the CA do not show the doubling in the very examples cited to illustrate this phenomenon. As far as manuscripts of the commentary are concerned, they do not properly indicate the sequence of a non-aspirate followed by the aspirate. In most cases, the preceding non-aspi- rate is not shown in writing. For example, the mss. offer the example idhmam. Written in this fashion, it does not illustrate the operation of the present rule. What is assumed is that the dh in idhmam undergoes doubling giving us the stage idhdhmam, which is then reduced to iddhmam by the present rule. Thus, the intended citation must be iddhmam. The remaining citation forms as intended must be ruruddhre, daddhre, and nicakkhnuḥ. Only in the case of dugdham, one need not posit dugddham. This, is because the form dugdham can be properly thought of as having been derived from dugh+dha, cf. P.8.2.32 (दादेर्धातोर्घः), where the sound gh is reduced to g by the present rule. For a dis- cussion on the reading rurudhre, see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 202).

246अध्याय १, पाद ४ The verse cited in the commentary is translated by Whitney as: “First mutes are substituted for seconds, when directly preceding the latter in a group; and thirds in like manner for fourths : this is a rule of universal application.” १.४.४. आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः । Whitney (1.95). See notes on the previous rule. Translation: The substitution is [effected] in accordance with [maximal featural] proximity [between the substitute and the re- placed items]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आन्तर्येण वृत्तिर्भवति । ‘मकारस्य स्पर्शे परसस्थानः’ (च.आ. २.१.३१)। ‘तत्(ङ्?)कुर्वन्ति’ । ‘तञ्चित्रयन्ति’ । ‘तण्टीकयन्ति’ । ‘तन्तारयन्ति’ । ‘तम्पा- चयन्ति’ । ‘विसर्जनीयस्य परसस्थानोऽघोषे’ (च.आ. २.२. १)। ‘वृक्ष[श्]छिनत्ति’ । ‘वृक्ष[श्]छादयति’ । ‘स्वरे नामि- नोऽन्तस्थाः’ (च.आ. ३.२.१६)। ‘दध्यत्र’ । ‘मध्वत्र’ । ‘मात्रर्थम्’ । ‘पित्रर्थम्’ । Note: After pointing out the fact that the commentator cites three CA rules where this term is used, Whitney further observes: “There are other rules to which the present precept applies; so, in explaining the one next preceding, it may be looked upon as determining the non-aspirate into which the duplication of an aspirate is converted to be surd or sonant according as the aspirate is surd or sonant (a matter which, in the other treatises, is expressly prescribed in the rules themselves, and not left for inference) : and possibly its bearing upon that rule is the reason why it is introduced here, rather than elsewhere in the treatise. Similar prescriptions are found in the Rik Pr. (i.14, r.56, lvii) and the Vāj. Pr. (i.142).” This procedure is also very close to P.1.1.50 (स्थानेऽन्तरतमः). The commentary supports the view that the replacement of vowels by semi-vowels occurs, not on the basis of the principle of one-to-one replacement or yathāsaṃkhya ‘one-to-one substitution for identically numbered substitutes and originals,’ but on the basis of maximal featural proximity or āntaratamya. For recent discussions on this issue relating to the interpretation of Pāṇini’s rule इको यणचि (P.6.1.77), see: Deshpande (1981), Cardona (1980-81), and Hueckstedt (1995). The examples cited here are all made-up examples and are

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका247 not citations from the Atharvan text. The examples दध्यत्र and मध्वत्र occur in the KV on P.6.1.77. The example वृक्षश्छादयति is found in the KV on P.8.4.40 (स्तोः श्चुना श्चुः). १.४.५. खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ इत्याकारादिकारोऽनुदात्तः । Whitney (1.96), F, I: इ after खैमखा ३. O: °इत्यका कौ. व्या. रादिकारो- नुदात्तः. Translation: In the forms kháṇvakhā́3i and kháimakhā́3i (both from AV 4.15.15), [in the pluta (protracted) vowel, i.e. ā́3i], the i following the ā́[3] is unaccented. Note: There is a good deal of confusion regarding the accentuation of these forms in the manuscripts and the editions of the ŚAV. As Whitney (1862: 62, footnote) points out: “E. I. and H. read the first word khaṇvakhā́3i, with a single accent only, and the printed text [i.e. the text of the Whitney-Roth edition of the AV : ख॒ण्व॒खाइ॒ खैम॒खाइ॒ मध्ये॑ तदुरि] has, wrongly, as it seems to me - followed their authority instead of that of the other manuscripts : and also, by some inexplicable oversight, signs of accent have become attached to the pluti figures, as if the preceding ā-s were circumflex, and the following i-s ac- cute. The line ought to read as follows: खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ मध्ये॑ तदुरि.” The VVRI edition follows Whitney’s corrected reading, while noting other deviant accentuations in the footnote. This reading shows that these two words contain two accented syllables each. The initial syllables of these words have the deri- vational or lexical udātta accent, while the pluta ā́3 gets the prosodic udātta accent which does not override the former. Other examples with dual udātta syllables are found in the Vedic literature: yajñápatā́3u, TS 6.6.2.3; súślokā́3ṃ súmaṅgalā́3ṃ, TS 1.8.16.2; úpahūtā́3m, TS 2.6.7.3; ágnā́3 íti, TS 6.5.8.4; juhávānī́3, TS 6.5.9.1; páśavā́3, MS 1.8.2; utsŕ̥jyā́3m, TS 7.5.7.1; bahávā́3 íti, ŚB 10.5.2.16; kúmārā́3, ŚB 14.9.1.1. Cf. Wackernagel and Debrunner (1896- 1954), I: 298-99; DelbrÜck (1888: 552-553); and Strunk (1983: 70, 99). Some of the Padapāṭha manuscripts, as noted in the VVRI edition, offer the following readings: ख॒ण्व॒खा३इ॑ । खै॒म॒खा३इ॑ । Such pada readings probably represent the hyper-corrected accentuation, on the basis of the as- sumed general rule that a word should have no more than one udātta syllable. Even the Whitney-Roth edition of the AV seems to have been based on this impression, and overlooked the exceptional nature of the pluta accent, which does not seem to override the lexical or derivational accent of the word. As noted above, Whitney did correct his error later. His Index Verborum to the

248अध्याय १, पाद ४ AV offers the corrected readings with dual udāttas. The corrected readings are followed by Wackernagel and Debrunner (1896-1954), Vol.I., p. 298. For additional discussion of these examples, see Note on CA (1.1.41). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ इति आकारा- त्पर इकारः अनुदात्तो भवति । ‘खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒’ इति (अ.वे. ४.१५.१५)। १.४.६. अवशा[३] आ बभूवाँ३ इतीतावेकारोऽप्लुतः । Whitney (1.97). A, B, C, I, J, P: ३ after वाँ. E, F, H, M, N, O: omit ३. A, B, D, E, F, H, K, N, P: °वां°. A, B, E, F, H, J, M, N, O(orig): °इति तावे°. Translation: In the [instances] ávaśā3 (AV 12.4.42) and ā́ babhūvā̃3 (AV 10.2.28), when followed by iti, the e [resulting through the combination of ā́3+i] is not protracted. Note: As Whitney accurately notes, these two examples are some- what different from each other in the circumstances of this euphonic combina- tion. In the first case, the word ávaśā3 is followed by íti in the text of the Saṃhitā itself which reads ávaśéti. But, the Padapāṭha offers the two padas as: ávaśā3 / íti /, with the first word ending in the pluta vowel. Regarding this first example, Whitney comments: “All the saṃhitā manuscripts, however, observe the precept of our treatise in making the combi- nation of avaśā3 with the succeeding word, and accordingly its protraction, which is assured by this rule and by i.105 (= CA 1.4.14), and which is exhib- ited by the pada-text, entirely disappears in saṃhitā - a strange imperfection of the latter text, and one which, if it did not exhibit itself in all the manuscripts, we should be very loth to introduce, upon the sole authority of this rule of the Prātiśākhya.” Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 699) says: “The more proper reading in b (in AV 12.4.42) would seem to be ávaśā́3íti, but all the saṃhitā- mss. read ávaśé’ti, as in our text, although the pada gives the sign of protrac- tion (3) also after avaśā, as it should be. But the Prāt. (i.97 = CA 1.4.6) re- quires -śé’ti simply: see the rules i.97 (= CA 1.4.6) and 105 (= CA 1.4.14), and notes to them.” Whitney’s doubts whether this rule should apply to the Saṃhitāpāṭha are strengthened by P.6.1.129 (अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते). The rule teaches something

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका249 similar to the present CA rule, except that the word upasthita is interpreted by Patañjali on this rule as अनार्षः इतिकरणः, “the word iti which does not stem from a Rṣi (= Saṃhitāpāṭha),” i.e. the word iti which appears in the Pada, Krama, etc. This would suggest that the rule did not apply to the Saṃhitāpāṭha. However, as Whitney points out, all the manuscripts of the AV exhibit the saṃhitā form ávaśéti, and hence we must accept that reading. Interestingly, even the Paippalāda (17.20.2, Raghuvir edn.) reading agrees with the Śaunakīya reading in this case. Thus, the assumption that the word avaśā3 ends in a pluta vowel is not directly based on the Saṃhitāpāṭha, but on the un- derstanding of the text as exhibited by the author of the AV Padapāṭha, an un- derstanding which is in close agreement with the precepts of Pāṇini, cf. P.8.2.97 (विचार्यमाणानाम्). Also see Strunk (1983: 67, 81-82, 97). In the second case, the word babhūvā̃3 ending in the pluta vowel al- ready appears in the Saṃhitā, and it is not followed by íti, either in the Saṃhitā or in the Padapāṭha. Such a combination arises only in the Kramapāṭha : ब॒भवेति॑ बभू॒वाँ३. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवशा आ बभूवाँ इति इतौ परतः ए(H, N: इ)कारः प्लुतो न भवति । ‘अ॒व॒शेति॑’ (संहिता, अ.वे. १२.४.४२)। ‘ब॒भवेति॑’ (क्रमपाठ, अ.वे. १०.२. २८)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - (वि)रामे प्लुतोऽनुनासिकः । तस्य चर्चायां सन्धौ अप्लुतवद्भावं विधाय इतिशब्देन सन्धौ अप्लुतः अन- नुनासिकः एकारः स्यात् । ‘ब॒भवेति॑ बभू॒वाँ३’ (क्रमपाठ, अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। एवं च ‘अ॒व॒शेति॑’ (संहिता, अ.वे. १२.४.४२) ‘ब॒भवेति॑’ (क्रमपाठ, अ.वे. १०.२.२८) सन्धीभवतः । १.४.७. व्यञ्जनान्यव्यवेतानि स्वरैः संयोगः । Whitney (1.98). A, B, C, D, M, P: °व्यपेतानि°. A, B: व्यञ्जनात्पर- व्यपेतानि°. E, F: व्यञ्जनान्यववे°. K reads °व्यञ्जनान्येवापेतानि°, and Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary justifies this reading. G: 1.4.7.

250अध्याय १, पाद ४ Translation: Consonants, not separated by [intervening] vowels, are termed saṃyoga ‘conjunction.’ Note: As Whitney notes, the term saṃyoga ‘conjunction’ is more comprehensive than the scope of the term saṃyukta defined in CA (1.2.9). For the distinction between these conceptions, see Notes on CA (1.2.2) and CA (1.2.9). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यञ्जनानि अव्यवेतानि स्वरैः संयोगो भवति । ‘अग्निरिन्द्रश्च तुष्टश्च वृक्षः प्लक्षो निदर्शनम् ।’ (Source?)। भा.भा.वृत्ति - द्वयोर्द्वयोर्व्यञ्जनयोः संयोगसंज्ञा । बहूनां व्यञ्जनानामप्येका संज्ञेति मतान्तरम् । ‘[स्]फ्यः’ (‘स्फ्यौ,’ अ.वे. ११.३.९, ‘स्फ्यः,’ तै.सं. १. ६. ८.२), ‘ऊर्क’ (not found in AV, तै.सं. १.१.११.१), ‘वि॒श्पत्न्यै॑’ (अ.वे. ७. ४६.२, VVRI edn.: ७.४८.२), ‘दुः॒ष्वप्न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.४६. ३), ‘स॒ह॒स्रा॒ह्ण्यम्(H, N: ह्वयं)’ (अ.वे. १०.८.१८) शेषः । (Referring to यज्+न ! यज्ञ) नस्य द्वित्वम् असिद्धवच्च, ‘स्तोः श्चुना श्चुः’ (पा. ८.४.४०) इति नस्य ञत्वे प्राप्ते व्यत्ययेन तवर्गयोगे चवर्गस्य तवर्गः । तेन जकारस्य दकारः

। तस्यासिद्धत्वाच्चुत्वेन द्वितीयनकारस्य ञकारः । मध्यम- नकारेण व्यवधानं न तस्यासिद्धत्वात् । एवं च दनञानां संयोगः द्न्ञ। अस्याक्षरस्य लेखने संकेतितं रूपं ‘ज्ञ’ इति । ‘य॒ज्ञस्य॑’ (अ.वे. २.३५.३) । पदादौ तु आचार्येणोपदिष्टः ज्ञाधातुः ‘ज्ञप मिच्च’ (पाणिनीयधातुपाठ, सिद्धान्तकौमुदी, धातुक्रमाङ्क १६२५), ‘प्रसंभ्यां जानुनो ज्ञुः’ (पा. ५.४. १२९) इति निर्देशात् पूर्वोक्तरचनायाः सामीचीन्यं ज्ञेयम् । वेदान्तरे चुत्वे प्राप्ते व्यत्ययेन ‘चोः कुः’ (पा. ८.२.३०) इति जकारस्य गकारः । तस्यासिद्धत्वान्नस्य ञत्वम् । ग्ञ अस्य

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका251 लिपिभेदः । जग्येन जग्यम् । मध्ये द्वितीयनकारकल्पने तस्य नकारस्यापि कुत्वेन ङत्वम् । जग्ङ्ञेन गङञानां संयोगः । अत्र मध्ये नकारः इत्युपलक्षणार्थं पूर्वोत्तरवर्णधर्मवान् सम- संज्ञक इत्यर्थः । Note: Here, Bhārgava-Bhāskara displays his expertise in the Pāṇinian system by quoting a number of Pāṇinian rules. Of course, building a Pāṇinian argument to account for the divergent pronunciations of jña is nothing but an exercise in futility. Also this whole discussion has little relevance to the context of the Prātiśākhya rule. १.४.८. समानपदेऽनुत्तमात्स्पर्शादुत्तमे यमैर्यथासंख्यम् । Whitney (1.99). A, B (corr), Nb: °नुत्तमास्पर्शा°. G: 1.4.8. Translation: Within the same word, after [a stop], other than the last [member of a stop series, i.e. after a non-nasal stop], its numerically corresponding twin [yama = nasalized version of the stop] is [inserted], before a last [member of a stop series, i.e. nasal stop]. Note: Here, the distinctive notion is that of a different principle of selection for the insertion, i.e. the principle of numerical correspondence (yathāsaṃkhya). This is the same principle which is enunciated in P.1.3.10 (यथासंख्यमनुदेशः समानाम्). The idea is as follows. For the set of four non-last stops in each series of stops, e.g. k, kh, g, and gh, there is a corresponding set of four nasalized twins or yamas, e.g. k̐, kh̐, g̐, gh̐. The insertion of these yamas takes place in accordance with their numerical correspondence, e.g. after k, we can insert only k̐, and not any other yama. On this rule, Whitney has a long note discussing the notion of yama, and the core of Whitney’s analysis is as follows: “If, now, we pronounce a t before a following m, as in ātma, the t, in the first place, suffers abhinidhāna, losing the explosion which is essential to its full utterance : the organs pass, without intervening unclosure, from the dental contact to the labial contact, by which latter the m is produced, with expulsion of sound through the nose. … But if we utter sound through the nose before transferring the organs from the dental to the labial contact, we give origin to a kind of nasal counterpart to the t, as a transition sound from it to the m. If this is not the yama of the Hindu

252अध्याय १, पाद ४ grammarians, I am utterly at a loss to conjecture what the latter sound should be. The theory which recognizes it might be compared with that which, in rule 50 (= CA 1.2.10), above, taught a general assimilation of the former consonant of a group, in its final portion, to the latter; it is still more nearly analogous with the surd which, by ii. 9 (= CA 2.1.9), is inserted between a final nasal and a following sibilant : this arises, like the yama, by an exchange of the emission (the anupradāna) belonging to the former letter for that belonging to the latter before the transfer of the organs from the one position to the other; and the t thus introduced, for example, between a n and a s has just as good a right to be called the yama or counterpart of the former letter, as has the n inserted after t before m.” On the whole, Whitney’s account is substantially accurate, except that his valuation of the contribution of the Indian phoneticians was not without hesitation. On the other hand, Max MÜller and Regnier, who held the Indian phoneticians in high esteem, wrongly believed the yama to be a nasal articula- tion preceding the stop. For a review, see: Allen (1953: 75-7). Whitney also mentions the two dominant views on yama found in the Sanskrit phonetic texts: “The ancient commentators themselves seem to have been somewhat in doubt as to how many different yamas there are, whether twenty, one for each of the non-nasal mutes, or a smaller number. The orthodox doctrine of the Rik Pr. seems to be that of twenty : but its commen- tator says that there are only four; one for all the first mutes, one for all the sec- onds, and so on.” Rightly calling the second alternative indefensible, Whitney also has an important criticism of the first alternative: “Physically, it would seem necessary that a nasal transition sound between two mutes should be of the nature either of the first or of the second : if the second, and that second a nasal, it would be indistinguishable from it; of the first, it would be identical with the nasal of that series, and so the same for all the mutes of the series.” Another question raised by Whitney relates to the possibility of a yama after an aspirated stop: “A much more serious difficulty is, that the theory of the yama allows its occurrence between an aspirate mute and a nasal : and we should suppose that the unclosure and brief emission of unintonated breath constituting the aspiration would form an impassable barrier between the two letters, the nasal utterance being unable to precede it, and the position of contact of the former letter to follow it, so that no nasal counterpart to the former letter could be uttered. I see no way of getting over this difficulty, excepting by sup- posing an inaccuracy in the analysis of the Hindu phonetists.” As is now shown by Allen (1953: 176-7), the two processes of breath and nasality may overlap, whether partially or wholly, and that this was the case with Sanskrit.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका253 One should also note that Whitney did not admit the possibility of voiced aspi- ration, and that modern phonetics clearly admits voiced aspiration or breathy voice. In spite of some of these valid doubts, Whitney is correct in assuming that the CA seems to have opted for the doctrine of twenty yamas. Both the commentaries seem to support such a view. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समानपदेऽनुत्तमात् स्पर्शात् उत्तमे पर- (त)ः स्पर्शे यमैर्व्यवधानं भवति । यथासंख्यम् । ‘स॒प- त्त्ँन॑(म्)’ (अ.वे. ७.१०९.३, VVRI edn.: ७.११४.३)। ‘श्रध्ध्ँनाति’ (not found in AV)। ‘य॒ज्ज्ँञः’ (४.११.४)। ‘गृह्णा(Whitney em.: भ्णा ! भ्भ्ँणा)ति’। Note: The form gr̥hṇāti is attested in AV (6.76.4), but cannot have a yama. The form gr̥bhṇāti is not attested in AV. However, we do have the form gr̥bhṇāmi in AV (3.8.6), which, with the insertion of the yama, would read gr̥bh+bh̐+ṇāmi. For śradhnāti which is not attested in AV, Whitney says: “the word most nearly resembling it is śrathnānaḥ (xiv.1.57), for which it may not impossibly be a false reading of the manuscript.” With the insertion of the yama, the form śrathnānaḥ should read śrath+th̐+nānaḥ. Whitney’s guess is probably on the mark, as the VVRI edition notes the variant śradhnānaḥ in the manuscript K for śrathnānaḥ in AV (14.1.57). It is possible that our commentary belongs to the tradition represented by the manuscript K recorded in the VVRI edition. Of course, no manuscripts ever record the yamas. भा.भा.वृत्ति - एकस्मिन् पदे अनुत्तमात् स्पर्शात् प्रथम- द्वितीयतृतीयचतुर्थस्पर्शात् उत्तमे पञ्चमे स्पर्शे परे मध्ये यथासंख्यं स्वस्ववर्गोक्तप्रथमादिस्पर्शसमैर्यमैर्भवितव्यम् । यमे पूर्वोत्तरवर्णधर्मौ ज्ञेयौ । प्रथमः यमः ‘असि॑क्क्ँनीः’ (अ.वे. ८.७.१), ‘रुक्क्ँमाम्(H, N: क्कां)’ (‘रुक्मा,’ अ.वे. ९.५. २५-२६), ‘याच्च्ँञैः’ (‘याच्ञाय,’ अ.वे. १२.४.३०), ‘अ[ा?]ट्ट्ँणारः’ (तै.सं. ५.६.५.३), ‘पत्त्ँनी’ (अ.वे. २. १२.१), ‘आत्त्ँमा’ (अ.वे. ५.१.७), ‘अप्प्ँन्यः’ (not found

254अध्याय १, पाद ४ in Vedic Saṃhitās), ‘पाप्प्ँमा’ (अ.वे. ६.२६.५), ‘वृ- क्क्ँणम्’ (अ.वे. ८.१२.२)। द्वितीययमः ‘चख्ख्ँनतुः’ (not found in Vedic Saṃhitās), ‘यछ्छ्ँञु’ (not found in Vedic Saṃhitās)…(incomplete manuscript) Note: The manuscripts do not show the yamas in writing. I have in- dicated the yamas with nasalized consonant signs in Devanagari. १.४.९. हकारान्नासिक्येन । Whitney (1.100). D, F, Ha, J, M, Na, P: हकारां°. O: °रांनांसिक्येन. A, B: °नासिकान. Translation: After h, there is [insertion of] a nāsikya [= h̐?], [before a nasal stop]. Note: CA (1.1.26: नासिक्यानां नासिका) refers to the sound or sounds called nāsikya ‘[pure?] nasal.’ See the Note on CA (1.1.26). Whitney ex- presses his doubts: “What the sound may be which is thus taught to form the step of transition from the aspiration to a following nasal, it is hard to say with confidence. I can only conjecture it to be a brief expulsion of surd breath through the nose, as continuation of the h, before the expulsion of the sonant breath which constitutes the nasal.” Whitney suggests that, in a word like brahma : “the Hindu phonetists doubtless regarded the h as belonging with and uttered like the a; and noticing at the same time the utterance, scarcely to be avoided, of at least a part of the h in the position of the m, they took account of it as a separate element, and called it nāsikya.” One of the misconceptions of Whitney was that he could not accept Sanskrit h to be a voiced aspiration, be- cause he did not think such a thing was possible. Thus, the nāsikya, if it in- volved aspiration, was not a ‘surd’ aspiration, but voiced nasal aspiration. Such nasal voiced aspirates are attested for a modern IA language like Marathi, e.g. nh (as in tinhī), ṇh (as in kaṇhaṇe), and, mh (as in tumhī). Also see Allen (1953: 77). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - हकारात् नासिक्येन समानपदे व्यव- धानं भवति । ‘प्राह्णः’ [ !

°ह् ँ्ण° ] (not in AV)। ‘पूर्वा- ह्णः’ [ !

°ह् ँ्ण° ] (not in AV)। ‘अ॒प॒रा॒ह्णः’ [ !

°ह् ँ्ण° ]

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका255 (अ.वे. ९.६.४६)। ‘अपह्मलयति’ [ !

°ह् ँ्म° ] (not in AV)। ‘विह्मलयति’ [ !

°ह् ँ्म° ] (not in AV)। ‘विह्नुते’ [ !

°ह् ँ्नु° ] (not in AV)। ‘ब्रह्म॑’ [ !

°ह् ँ्म° ] (अ.वे. १. १९.४)। Note: The sound called nāsikya is represented by the Nagari ligature ँ् in the above notations. The manuscripts do not show the nāsikya in writing. For details on the cited examples, see the commentary on CA 1.2.18 (रेफहकार- क्रमजं च). १.४.१०. रेफादूष्मणि स्वरपरे स्वरभक्तिरकारस्यार्धं चतुर्थमित्येके । Whitney (1.101). Translation: After an r, and before a spirant followed by a vowel, there is an insertion of a vocalic fraction (svarabhakti), which is [equivalent to] half of a short a, or quarter according to some [authorities]. Note: Calling it a perfectly intelligible theory, Whitney says: “The theory evidently is, that a r cannot be pronounced in immediate combination with any following consonant : there must always be slipped between them a little bit of a transition-vowel, varying in length, according to different authori- ties, from a half to an eighth of a mora, and longer before a sibilant or h, if these be followed in turn by a vowel, than before other consonants; while in quality it coincides with the a.” Whitney, however, was not able to discern the reason why the fractional vowel inserted before spirants must be longer than before other con- sonants, though he does note the practice of the AV manuscripts of writing r̥ for r before spirants. Referring to Wackernagel and Debrunner (1896-1954), Vol.I., § 50, Allen (1953: 73) points out that, in such cases, “the metre also occasionally requires the pronunciation of a vowel which is not noted in our texts (e.g. darśata = 4 syllables).” Besides the variation of the length of the in- serted vowel fraction, different texts suggest that the vowel is r̥, a, i, e, or u, cf. Allen (1953: 73).

256अध्याय १, पाद ४ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफादूष्मणि स्वरपरे स्वरभक्तिर्भवति । अकारस्य अर्धं चतुर्थमित्येके । अपर आह । ऋकारस्वर- भक्तिः । ऊष्मसु स्वरपरेष्वर्धाकारवर्णो व्यञ्जनं शेष इति । ‘रेफादन्यदृकारे यत्तस्यार्धं पूर्वसस्वरम् । वचनेन व्यवेतानां संयोगत्वं विहन्यते ॥ ऋवर्णेऽपि तु रेफस्य चार्धमात्रा प्रतिज्ञया । अर्धमात्रा स्वरं विद्यात्सा चैवं क्रियते पुनः ॥ तान्ह्रस्वोभयतः कुर्याद्यथा मात्रा भवेदिति । दर्शो वर्षं तथा तर्सः(W’s em.:ऋतवः) बर्हिश्चात्र निदर्शनम् ॥ एतामृतिं विजानीयात्स्वरभक्तिर्यदा भवेत् ।’ (source?) Note: The words varsam and tarsam are cited as examples in the MB on P.8.3.59. Referring to the verses cited in the commentary, Whitney says: “Next follow several verses, a part of which are of a character which would render their introduction under rule 37 (= CA 1.1.37), above, more approppri- ate, while one line, the second, belongs rather under rule 98 (= CA 1.4.7). Placing the responsibility for the inelegance of these verses upon the com- mentator or the manuscript, Whitney offers the following translation: “Half of what there is in the r̥-vowel different from r is of the same character with the preceding vowel. Of consonants separated by audible sound, the conjunction is destroyed. In the r̥-vowels there is, by express rule, half a mora of r, half a mora is to be recognized as vowel, and that, again, is thus managed : put the parts upon both sides of the short vowel, so as to make out a mora : examples are darśa, varṣa, tatha r̥tavaḥ, [and] barhiḥ : know this to be the way when a svarabhakti is to be produced.” There seems to be an important distinction between the svarabhakti of longer duration and the svarabhakti of the shorter duration. With the svara- bhakti of the longer duration, as the verses here seem to say, a consonant clus- ter is broken apart, by the creation of an additional syllable. On the other hand, as CA 1.4.13, below, shows, the svarabhakti of the shorter duration did not lead to the break-up of a cluster.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका257 १.४.११. अन्यस्मिन्व्यञ्जने चतुर्थमष्टमं वा । Whitney (1.102). A, B, D: Avagraha after °चतुर्थम. Translation: [After r], before another consonant [= non- spirant], [the inserted fractional vowel is equivalent to] a quarter or an eighth [of a short a in duration]. Note: See the Note on the previous rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्यस्मिन् व्यञ्जने रेफात् अकारस्य चतुर्थं वा अष्टमं वा भवति । ‘अ॒र्य॒मा’ (अ.वे. १.११.१)। ‘पर्व॑’ (अ.वे. १.१२.२)। ‘धर्म॑णा’ (अ.वे. ६.१३२.१)। १.४.१२. तदेव स्फोटनः । Whitney (1.103). P separates this rule from the previous rule by add- ing a daṇḍa as a correction. Translation: That [i.e. insertion of the shorter fractional vowel of 1/8 or 1/4 mora duration] is itself [called] sphoṭana. Note: There seems to be a difference of opinion between Whitney and others on what this rule means. Whitney does not seem to identify the sphoṭana with the shorter svarabhakti, but only admits that a sphoṭana is of the same duration: “(Trans:) Of the latter value is sphoṭana. (Comment:) That is to say, if I do not misapprehend the meaning of the rule, sphoṭana, like the shorter svarabhakti, has a quarter or an eighth the quantity of a short a : or it may be that the emphatic eva would restrict the reference to the latter value, the eighth, alone.” Allen (1953: 74) seems to understand that the svarabhakti of the length of 1/8 a to be the element referred to as sphoṭana. Allen further clarifies: “From a later passage (= CA 2.1.38: vargaviparyaye sphoṭanaḥ pūrveṇa ced virāmaḥ) we learn that this occurs in groups where a stop is followed by an- other of a more back series, especially a velar (e.g. in vaṣaṭ-kr̥tam, tad gāyatre). … This would appear to indicate a type of svarabhakti, whether voiced or voiceless, the infinitesimal duration of which is suggested by the specification of a value 1/8 a, in fact a minimal audible release. The mechanism of the fea-

258अध्याय १, पाद ४ ture referred to is perhaps the release of the front closure during the formation but before the completion of the back closure, resulting in the momentary out- flow of an air-stream attenuated by the back constriction.” In my view, sphoṭana is just another name for the shorter svarabhakti of the duration of a quarter of or an eighth of an a, and is not different from such a svarabhakti. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तदेव स्फोटनो व्यञ्जको भवति । ‘व॒ष॒ट्का॒रेण॑’ (अ.वे. ५.२६.१२)। ‘अव(N: व्य)त्कम्’ (अ.वे. २.३.१)। ‘ए॒ज॒त्काः’ (अ.वे. ५.२३.७)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टु- ब्गा॑य॒त्री’ (अ.वे. १८.२.६)। Note: On the citation from AV (2.3.1), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 40) says: “Avatká (p. avat°kám : quoted in the comment to Prāt. i.103 = CA 1.4.12; ii.38 = CA 2.1.38; iv.25 = CA 4.1.25) is obscure, but is here translated as from the present participle of root av (like ejatká, v.23.7 ∀cf. abhimādyatká, ŚB., vikṣiṇatká, VS.#).” १.४.१३. पूर्वस्वरं संयोगाविघातश्च । Whitney (1.104), C, Hb, I (orig), Nb, O: °विघातश्च. A, B, D, F, I (corr), J, K, M, P: °भिघातश्च. E, F: Visarga after पूर्व. J, M: पूर्वसः स्वरं°. A, B, D: पूर्वसः स्वरसंयो°. Ha, Na: °विविघातश्च. P: °पूर्वसस्वरं°. Translation: [With the shorter svarabhakti called sphoṭana, it carries] the accent of the previous syllable [lit. vowel], and there is no dismemberment of the consonant cluster. Note: Whitney takes this rule to mean that all the phonetic insertions taught in this section “are to be reckoned as belonging to the preceding vowel, and sharing in its accent; and whereas it might seem that the insertion of the vowel-fragment, and of its kindred sphoṭana, dissolved the conjunction of the consonants between which they were inserted … the contrary is expressly de- clared to be true.” He further states: “The Rik Pr. alone, besides our treatise, thinks it necessary to say (vi. 10, r. 35, ccccxi) that the svarabhakti does not dissolve the conjunction : in the Vāj. Pr. it is left to be pointed out by the com- mentator.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका259 In my opinion, the present rule is restricted to the shorter svarabhakti alias sphoṭana, and does not extend to the cases of longer svarabhakti, where as pointed out by Allen (1953: 73): “the metre also occasionally requires the pro- nunciation of a vowel which is not noted in our texts (e.g. darśata = 4 sylla- bles).” Support for such a restricted interpretation is derived clearly from the CAB, which refers only to the shorter svarabhakti (cf. यत्तद्रेफादकारस्य चतुर्थं वा भवत्यष्टमं वा), and all the examples it cites are identical with the examples for the shorter svarabhakti offered under CA (1.4.11). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वपूर्वस्वरं च तद्भवति संयोगस्य चा- विघातः । यत्तद्रेफादकारस्य चतुर्थं वा भवत्यष्टमं वा । ‘अ॒र्य॒मा’ (अ.वे. १.११.१)। ‘पर्व॑’ (अ.वे. १.१२.२)। ‘धर्म॑णा’ (अ.वे. ६.१३२.१)। १.४.१४. खण्व॒खा३इ॒ खैम॒खा३इ॒ मध्ये॑ तदुरि (अ.वे. ४.१५. १५)। इ॒दं भू॑या३ इ॒दा३मिति॑ (अ.वे. ९.६.१८)। ऊ॒र्ध्वो नु सृ॒ष्टा३स्ति॒र्यङ् नु सृ॒ष्टा३ः सर्वा॒ दिशः॒ पुरु॑ष॒ आ ब॑भू॒वाँ३ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। परा॑ञ्चमोद॒नं प्राशी३ः प्र॒त्यञ्चा३मिति॑ (अ.वे. ११.३.२६)। त्वमो॑द॒नं प्राशी३स्त्वामो॑द॒ना३इति॑ (अ.वे. ११.३.२७)। व॒शेया३- मव॒शेति॑ (अ.वे. १२.४.४२)। यत्तदासी॑३दिदं नु ता३- दिति॑ (अ.वे. १२.५.५०)। इति प्लुतानि । इत उत्तर- मधिकम् । किमर्थः परिपाठः । एतावत्स्वार्थोऽपि । बहु- विधास्त्रिविधाः प्लुतयो भवन्ति । स्वरपरा अभिनिष्टान- परा व्यञ्जनपरास्तासां याः समानाक्षरपरास्ता इताव- प्लुतवद्भवन्ति । इतावप्लुतवद्भवन्ति । Whitney (1.105): ends with °दिति प्लुतानि, the rest being cited as part of the commentary. C: omits the entire passage. E, F: omit beginning with इत उत्तरमधिकम्. B, D: तदुरी इदं. A, D: omit Repha in °त्यूर्ध्वो°. H, N: omit नु after तिर्यङ्. A, B, D, H, K, N: °बभूवां. B, D: omit पुरुष after सर्वा दिशः. H, N: °प्राशीःस्त्वा°. F, H, N: place ३ after °मवशेति°. A, B, D: °मुता३दिति° for °नुता३दिति°. H, N: किमर्थः परिपाठः before इत उत्तरमधिकम्. E, F: omit किमर्थः

260अध्याय १, पाद ४ परिपाठः. H, N: place Daṇḍa after एतावत्स्वार्थोऽपि. A, B, D, J, K, M: °एतावत्प्लुतवद्भवन्ति°. The repetition of the passage इतावप्लुतवद्भवन्ति indicates that this is the end of the Adhyāya. O places इत उत्तरमधिकम् at the very end of the passage, while P omits it. O places a daṇḍa after स्वरपरा. Translation: There are the following cases of protracted vowels [in the ŚAV]: AV (4.15.15), (9.6.18), (10.2.28), (11.3. 26), (11.3.27), (12.4.42), and (12.5.50). Why is this listing made? Any instances beyond this [listing] are in excess [i.e. do not belong to the ŚAV]. The following is also the intrinsic purpose [of the listing], [namely, to point out that] protractions are of various types, specifically, three types: followed by vowels, followed by abhiniṣṭāna [= visarjanīya, ḥ], and fol- lowed by consonants. Among them, those which are followed by simple vowels are treated as if non-protracted before iti, [e.g. ávaśéti, AV (12.4.42), Pada: ávaśā3 / íti /]. Note: Concerning the variant readings and interpretations for the first passage, see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 175). On the passage from AV (11.3.27), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 627) has some important remarks: “The pluta- or protracted syllables in this and the next verse are quoted in Prāt. i.105 (= CA 1.4.14), but nothing is said as to their accentuation, from which it seems most plausible to infer that the protraction made no difference in the ac- cent; and though in the Brāhmaṇas a protracted syllable is always accented, that is not the invariable rule in the Vedic texts.” Lanman (ibid.) also notes the great variety of mss. readings for the passage concerned. Also see Whitney’s comments on AV 9.6.18 and 10.2.28, and Strunk (1983: 68). The passage after iti plutāni is treated by Whitney as part of the commentary, and translated as follows: “for what reason is this enumeration made? because any other instance than these is in excess : within these limits the protracted vowel is pointed out by its own meaning (?). Protractions are various; namely, of three kinds: those which affect a syllable ending in a vowel, in visarjanīya, and in a consonant, respectively; among these, those which affect syllables ending in simple vowels assume their unprotracted form before iti.” I have given my own translation above, and I believe it is an improvement over Whitney’s. Whitney, on this rule, discusses in some detail, problems of accentua- tion of the cited examples. However, in most cases, the accents cannot be de- cided on the basis of either the CA rules or manuscripts. The only case, where

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका261 the CA rule is relevant for the accent of a pluta syllable is AV (4.15.15). For a discussion of the accents of this example, see the Note on CA (1.4.5). Also see Strunk (1983: 90). For the accents of examples from AV (10.2.28) and AV (11.3.26, 27), I have followed the readings of the VVRI edition, rather than those of Roth- Whitney edition. See CA (4.1.28) and the Note on it for further discussion on these examples. Also see Strunk (1983) for an extensive discussion. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - The manuscripts H and N contain this entire passage. However, there is no Bhāṣya on it. इति प्रथमाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः । प्रथमोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ H, N: चतुराध्यायिकायां च प्रथमोध्यायः समाप्तः ॥१३॥. C: चतुराध्यायिकायां च प्रथमोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥१०३॥. E, F: प्रथमस्य चतुर्थः पादः । आथर्वणे चतुराध्यायि- कायां प्रथमोध्यायः॥. A, B, D, M: चतुर्थः पादः । प्रथमोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥. I: इति प्रथमाध्याये चतुर्थः पादः ॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकायां प्रथमोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥१॥ सूत्राणि ११०. O: सूत्राणि ॥१९॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायि- कायां प्रथमस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥४॥ प्रथमोध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ P: चतुर्थः पादः ॥ प्रथमो- ध्यायः ॥ Note: Notice the difference in the number of rules mentioned for this Pāda and the cumulative numbers given for the first Adhyāya in the colophons of different manuscripts. Not only do the manuscripts H and N list only 13 Sūtras for this Pāda, the last Sūtra, i.e. 1.4.14 is most probably not considered to be a Sūtra by the CAB. On the other hand, the manuscript O says that there are 19 rules in this Pāda. The manuscript C omits this entire last rule and offers the cumulative number of Sūtras for this Adhyāya to be 103. On the other hand, the manuscript I lists the cumulative number of rule for this Adhyāya to be 110. It not only includes the last passage as part of the Sutra text, it probably counted its separate parts as seven different Sūtras. It would seem that this passage is indeed not part of the CAB itself, as it was once thought by Whitney. This must be the case because this passage does not comment on some earlier rule. However, its inclusion in the manuscripts of the CAB indicates that the copyists of this commentary knew that this passage had been admitted as part of the Sūtra text, though the CAB does not comment on it.

262अध्याय १, पाद ४ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चतुराध्यायिकायां च प्रथमोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥१३॥. ___________________________________

॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ प्रथमः पादः ॥ २.१.१. संहितायाम् । Whitney (2.1). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [The following rules apply] in [the context of] combining [the separated words given in the Padapāṭha to form a continuous text, i.e. the Saṃhitāpāṭha]. Note: In general, the Prātiśākhya literature took for granted the exis- tence of the Padapāṭha, and assumed that the Saṃhitāpāṭha was derived by ex- plicitly combining the separated words given in the Padapāṭha, following the rules of sandhi. This rule is a general heading (adhikāra) with its scope extending over the second and the third chapters of the CA. However, as Whitney warns: “We shall see, however, that our treatise does not everywhere strictly limit itself to what concerns the conversion of pada-text into saṃhitā.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संहितायामित्येतदधिकृतं वेदितव्यम् । इत उत्तरं यदनुक्रमिष्यामः । २.१.२. पदान्तानामनुत्तमानां तृतीया घोषवत्स्वरेषु । Whitney (2.2). A, B, D: °तृतीयो°. J, M (corr): Daṇḍa after °नुत्तमानां. Translation: Word-final stops, except the last [members of the stop-series], are replaced with the [corresponding] thirds [of the series, i.e. voiced aspirate stops], before voiced consonants and vowels. Note: Whitney observes: “Considering that, by i. 6 (= CA 1.1.8), only the first and last of each series of mutes can occur as finals, this rule might have said prathamānām, ‘first mutes,’ instead of anuttamānām, ‘mutes not nasal;’ both this and the following rules, however, seem constructed in view of the disputed character of the final non-nasal mute, and of the doctrine of Śaunaka himself that it is a media, and not a tenuis.” One should note that the

अध्याय २, पाद १ 264 Padapāṭha lists the separated words as ending in the first stops, i.e. voiceless unaspirated stops, e.g. yat / yatra, AV (2.1.1); tasmāt / vāḥ, AV (3.13.3). However, the present rule is formulated in a generic way. One may see here not only the need to accommodate the doctrine of Śaunaka, as noticed by Whitney, but also the influence of the generic grammars of Sanskrit of the type represented by Pāṇini, cf. P.8.4.53 (झलां जश् झशि), which subjects all non- nasal stops, as well as spirants, to substitution by an appropriate voiced unaspi- rated stop. However, Pāṇini’s rule applies to internal, as well as external, sandhis, and interestingly does not specify this change explicitly before vowels. In a procedure somewhat reminiscent of Śaunaka’s view noted above, cf. CA (1.1.10), Pāṇini, as a generic procedure, changes all word-final non- nasal stops, and spirants, to the appropriate voiced unaspirated stops, cf. P.8.2.39 (झलां जशोऽन्ते). It is, however, appropriate to note that Pāṇini is not dealing with word-finals before pause, as is the case with Śaunaka’s doctrine. We must mention another dilemma raised by this rule. Since the rule refers to ghoṣavat ‘possessed of ghoṣa, voiced’ and svara ‘vowel’ as separate classes, a question is raised whether the term ghoṣavat did not include vowels (svara) because vowels do not have the feature of ghoṣa, or whether, for some reason, the term ghoṣavat was used only for consonants to distinguish voiced consonants from voiceless consonants. If the first alternative is valid, then one could argue for two modes of voicing, one represented by ghoṣa, which be- longed only to voiced consonants, and nāda, which belonged to both the voiced consonants and vowels. On the other hand, some have argued that there is no phonetic distinction between nāda and ghoṣa, and that the term ghoṣavat is used to refer to voiced consonants, with no intention of denying the feature of ghoṣa to vowels. For the details of this debate, see: Deshpande (1976, 1976a), Cardona (1983, 1986). Also see: Introduction, section 5.11. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्तानामनुत्तमानां तृतीया भवन्ति घोषवत्सु वर्णेषु स्वरेषु च परतः । ‘यद्यत्र॒ विश्व॑म्’ (अ.वे. २.१.१)। ‘यद्या॒मं च॒क्रुः’ (अ.वे. ६.११६.१)। ‘तस्मा॒द्वा- र्नाम॑’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.३)। ‘वेवि॑ष॒द्विषः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.५)। ‘यद्राजा॑नः’ (अ.वे. ३.२९.१)। ‘सु॒हस्तो॑ गो॒धुगु॒त’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.७)। ‘सा वि॒राडृ॑षयः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘तदभू(H: मू, N: म्व)तम्’ (not in AV)। ‘त्रिष्टु(H, N: तृषु)बत्र’ (not in AV)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका265 Note: The example तदभूतम् cited by the CAB is not found in the Vul- gate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. It is clear that, in making such claims, Surya Kanta did not consult the original manuscripts, H and N. Other- wise, his so-called genuinely Śaunakīya examples may have been तदम्वतम् (N) or तदमूतम् (H). Surya Kanta makes no allowance for either the inaccuracies of the copyists, or for the possibility that the commentator may occasionally quote a passage which is not Atharvan. Interestingly, Whitney also reports another example, i.e. त्रिष्टुबत्र cited by the commentator which does not occur in the AV. However, Surya Kanta does not use that example for raising the same claims. The example त्रिष्टुबत्र is found in the KV on P.8.2.39 (झलां जशोऽन्ते). २.१.३. पदान्ते चाघोषाः । Whitney (2.3). D, I (corr): °वाघोषाः. Translation: Further, at the end of a word, [before a pause, as in the Padapāṭha, or at the end of a metrical foot in the Saṃhitāpāṭha, the non-nasal stops] are replaced with [the corre- sponding] voiceless [unaspirated stops]. Note: Whitney comments: “This, in view of i. 6 (= CA 1.1.8), is a superfluous precept, and its introduction is only to be accounted for by the considerations adverted to under the last rule.” I do not believe that the rule is superfluous at all. CA (1.1.8) is more of the nature of a listing of what could occur in the word-final position. On the other hand, this rule is an operational rule achieving that result. Since the inputs to this rule are represented by the word anuttamānām in the previous rule, it represents a theoretically wider pro- cedure replacing all possible word-final non-nasal stops with the correspond- ing voiceless unaspirated stops. The rule is followed by the Saṃhitā and the Padapāṭha manuscripts for the ŚAV. Pāṇini 8.4.56 (वावसाने) says that the change of word-final non-nasal stops to voiceless stops is optional, or preferable (if we follow Kiparsky’s view, cf. Kiparsky 1979, on the meaning of vā in Pāṇini). The Kiparskyan interpretation of Pāṇini brings him closer to the view of the CA. However, the traditional commentators view this rule as being simply optional, and this may have influenced the reading in the two CA manuscripts, D, I (corr): °वाघोषाः.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 266 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्ते चाघोषा भवन्ति पदान्तानाम- नुत्तमानाम् । ‘गो॒धुक्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒षत्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्’ (अ.वे. ८. ९.२०)। २.१.४. अघोषेषु च । Whitney (2.4). B, D: °अंघोषे°. Translation: Also, before voiceless [consonants, the word- final non-nasal stops become voiceless]. Note: As with the previous rule, Whitney says: “Also an unnecessary specification; since final surds do not require to become surds before succeed- ing initial surds, but simply remain unchanged.” The rule takes a more generic view of the word-final consonants as inputs for this rule, possibly assuming that there are words which, in derivational or recitational terms, may be as- sumed to end in voiced stops. Such a recitational tradition was attributed to Śaunaka, cf. CA (1.1.10: प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः). The rule may be understood as saying that, even if one assumes that the Padapāṭha could have words ending in non-nasal voiced stops, these must be changed to their voiceless counterparts in sandhi combinations imminent in the Saṃhitā- pāṭha. Compare P.8.4.55 (खरि च). Note that Pāṇini’s rule does not distinguish between external versus internal sandhi. The present CA rule, though it applies to the transformation of the Padapāṭha into Saṃhitāpāṭha, may apply to those internal sandhis, where the Padapāṭha splits the base from the affix, or members of a compound. For example, the word apsu (AV 1.4.4) is split in the Padapāṭha as ap+su. One wonders if the Padapāṭha reading could have been ab+su, in accordance with Śaunaka’s precept, cf. CA (1.1.10). As- suming, such a possibility, the present rule would change the b to p in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. The same sort of dilemma may be perceived in a form like utta- rasmin (AV 1.9.1), which is split up in the Padapāṭha as ut+tarasmin. A Padapāṭha which strictly followed the precept of Śaunaka could have had the reading ud+tarasmin. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अघोषेषु च अघोषा भवन्ति पदान्ता- नामनुत्तमानाम् । ‘वाक्चे॑न्द्रि॒यं च॑’ (अ.वे. १२.५.७)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका267 ‘वि॒राट् प्र॒जाप॑तिः’ (अ. वे. ९.१०.२४)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्प॑ञ्चद॒शेन॑’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। २.१.५. उत्तमा उत्तमेषु । Whitney (2.5). B, D: Daṇḍa after उत्तमा. Translation: [The non-nasal word-final stops] are replaced with [the corresponding] nasal [stops, lit. last members of the stop-series], before nasal [stops, lit. last members of the stop- series]. Note: Whitney makes an important observation: “The Prātiśākhyas are unanimous in this requirement. … Pāṇini, as has already been noticed (under i.2 = CA 1.1.3), [cf. P.8.4.45: यरोऽनुनासिकेऽनुनासिको वा], allows either the unaspirated sonant or the nasal before a nasal, while the manuscript usage is almost, if not quite, invariably in favor of the nasal.” Whitney’s view of Pāṇini may now be revised in view of the interpretation proposed by Kiparsky (1979) that vā in Pāṇini refers to a preferred option. This would suggest that Pāṇini’s preferred option is more in agreement with the Prātiśākhyas and the practice of the manuscripts. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उत्तमा भवन्ति उत्तमेषु परतः पदा- न्तानामनुत्तमानाम् । ‘ऋध॑ङ्मन्त्रो॒ योनि॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५.१.१)। ‘य उ॒दान॒ण्न्याय॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ६.७७.२)। ‘अ॑र्ण॒वान्म॑ह॒तस्परि॑’ (अ.वे. १.१०.४)। ‘म॒दुघा॒न्मधु॑मत्तरः’ (अ.वे. १.३४.४.)। ‘मध्या॑न्नी॒चैः,’ (अ.वे. ४.१.३)। ‘य स्ता॒यन्मन्य॑ते॒’ (अ.वे. ४.१६.१.)। ‘त्रिष्टुम्नयति’ (not in AV, cited in KV on P.8.4. 45)। Note: As Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 62) points out, the APR (136: उत्तमा उत्तमेष्विति) directly refers to our present rule. Referring to AV (1.34.4), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 35) says: “The majority of our mss. (nor Bp.I.E.D.) read here madhúghāt in b, as do also the Prāt. mss. in both the places (ii.5c = CA 2.1.5; iv.16 = CA 4.1.38) where the verse is quoted; but at vi.102.3 all read -du- ; SSP. reads -du- (as does our text), and makes no report

अध्याय २, पाद १ 268 of discordance among his authorities. The comm. (= Sāyaṇa) has -du-, and derives the word from madhudugha.” Contrary to Whitney’s report, both the manuscripts of the CAB have the reading madughāt on both the rules referred to by him, and not madhughāt. For a discussion of different readings for AV (4.16.1), i.e. yas tāyat or ya(s) stāyat, see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 176, also p. 464). २.१.६. द्वितीयाः शषसेषु । Whitney (2.6). Translation: Before ś, ṣ, and s, [the word-final non-nasal stops] become second [members of the series, i.e. voiceless as- pirated stops]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्वितीया भवन्ति शषसेषु परतः पदा- न्तानामनुत्तमानाम् । ‘गोधुख्(H, N: क्)शेते’ (not in AV)। ‘विराठ्(H, N: ड्)शेते’ (not in AV)। ‘दृषथ्शेते’ (not in AV)। ‘त्रिष्टुफ्(H, N: प्)शेते’ (not in AV)। ‘गोधुख्(H, N: क्)षण्डे’ (not in AV)। ‘विराठ्(H, N: ड्)षण्डे’ (not in AV)। ‘दृषथ्(N: त्)षण्डे’ (not in AV)। ‘त्रिष्टुफ्(H, N: प्)- षण्डे’ (not in AV)। ‘गोधुख्साये’ (not in AV)। ‘विराठ्(H, N: ड्)साये’ (not in AV)। ‘दृषथ्(H, N: त्)साये’ (not in AV)। ‘त्रिष्टुफ्(H, N: प्)साये’ (not in AV)। अपदान्तानामपि शषसेषु द्वितीया भवन्ति इति शाङ्ख(H, N: ख्य)मित्रिशाक- टायनवात्स्याः । ‘तस्या॑ अ॒ग्निर्व॒थ्सः’(H, N: त्सः) (अ.वे. ४. ३९.२)। Note: Except for the last example offered by the commentary, all the examples are fabricated examples. The same examples are found in the CAB on CA (1.2.9). Also see the Note on CA (1.2.9). Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 28-29, 40) points out that the VPR (4.119: असस्थाने मुदि द्वितीयं शौनकस्य) is a patent reference to CA (2.1.6). However, rejecting Weber’s claim that the CA is later than the VPR, Surya Kanta says that “the kernel of the VPr. is older than is yet supposed to be.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका269 Such references (to CA) can only show the various recasts each work of this class has undergone.” While it is probably the case that the kind of phonetic changes taught in this rule were genuinely part of Śaunaka’s doctrine, such a doctrine is followed neither by the manuscripts of the AV, nor by the manu- scripts of the CAB. Whitney, on this rule, points out the disagreements be- tween the different Prātiśākhyas, but finally says: “The manuscripts of the Atharvan read always the simple surd before the sibilant, and in the printed text we have of course followed their authority rather than that of the Prātiśākhya.” This particular doctrine is not followed by Pāṇini, but is ascribed by a Vārttika on P.8.4.48 to a teacher named Pauṣkarasādi (चयो द्वितीयाः शरि पौष्करसादेः). Even while intending to exemplify this rule, the manuscripts of the commentary do not show the change in writing. २.१.७. तेभ्यः पूर्वचतुर्थो हकारस्य । Whitney (2.7). Translation: After them [i.e. word-final non-nasal stops, the following] h is replaced by the fourth [member of the stop- series, i.e. the voiced aspirated stop], corresponding to the pre- ceding [word-final stop]. Note: As Whitney notes, the Prātiśākhyas generally follow this rule, but that Pāṇini (8.4.62: झयो होऽन्यतरस्याम्) allows this change optionally. The mss. of both the AV, as well as those of the CAB, almost universally follow the rule. All the examples cited by the commentator are examples of a word- final t, as given in the AV Padapāṭha, combined with the following h. In all the cases, the Pāṇinians are likely to treat the first member as ending in d, rather than in t, cf. P.8.2.39. However, the CA tradition converts all prepausal non- nasal stops to voiceless unaspirated stops. Pāṇinian commentators offer ex- amples of other word-final non-nasal stops combined with the word-initial h. Macdonell (1916, 1971: 39), offers Vedic examples like sadhryàg ghitā́ from sadhryàk + hitā́, and ávāḍ ḍhavyā́ni from ávāṭ + havyā́ni. While the CA rule is a generic rule, the examples offered in the commentary do not exhibit the vari- ety required to justify this generality. It is possible that the rule shows the oc- casional shift of the CA in the direction of the general grammar of Sanskrit. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तेभ्यः पदान्तेभ्यः अनुत्तमेभ्यः पूर्व- चतुर्थो भवति हकारस्य । ‘उद्ध॑र्षन्तां मघवन्’ (अ.वे. ३.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 270 १९.६)। ‘उद्ध॑र्षय॒ सत्व॑ना॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.८)। ‘उ॒द्ध॒र्षि- (H, N: °र्ष°)णं॒ मुनि॑(H, N: °नी°)केशम्’ (अ.वे. ८.६. १७)। ‘कद्ध॑ नू॒(H, N: °र्द्धमू°)नम्’ (अ.वे. १८.१.४)। ‘पृ॒थि॒व्याम॑स्तु॒ यद्ध॑रः’ (अ.वे. १८.२.३६)। ‘तेज॑स्व॒द्धरः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.३.७१)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 60) states that the APR (163) and the CAB on the present rule cite identical examples. However, note that, in this case, the APR cites only the first three examples out of the total of six cited by the CAB. One should also point out that this is not a case of a gaṇa or a complete listing, and the examples are only illustrative in both the texts. Also see APR (p. 110). २.१.८. टकारात्सकारे तकारेण । Whitney (2.8). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction, while O crosses out a daṇḍa as a correction. Translation: After a [final] ṭ, a [dental] t [is inserted], before an [initial] s. Note: The insertion of t between ṭ and s facilitates the transition from ṭ to s. It suggests that after an unreleased ṭ, there is first a shift of the organs to the position of a dental stop, before moving on to the dental spirant. The clo- sure begins at the retroflex position and then shifts, without release to the den- tal position. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - टकारात्सकारे परतः तकारेण व्यव- धानं भवति । ‘वि॒राट्त्स्व॒(H, N: ड्स्व)राज॑म्’ (अ.वे. ८.९. ९)। ‘पृ॒त॒ना॒षाट्त्सु॒(H, N: ड्सु)वीरः॑’ (अ.वे. ११.१.२)। ‘त्रि॒श॒ताः ष॑ट्त्स(H, N: ड्स)ह॒स्राः’ (अ.वे. ११.५.२)। Note: The examples offered by the commentators illustrate the juncture of one word with the next, the juncture of a base with an affix, and the juncture of the first member of a compound with the second. In all these cases, the Padapāṭha splits the components.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका271 Referring to the first example cited above, Whitney and Lanman (AV Transl. Vo.II., p. 508) make some important observations: “No ms. !of ours∀ inserts t between -rā́ṭ and sva- in b !but four of SSP’s do so∀, as required by Prāt. ii.8 (under which this is one of the passages quoted).” Given this condi- tion of the mss., one needs to seriously investigate, whether certain mss. or groups of mss. follow the rules of the CA more consistently, and whether this reflects a somewhat separate transmission. The manuscripts of the CAB, while offering examples for this rule show neither the Padapāṭha form, nor the Saṃhitāpāṭha form, but read a final ḍ followed by an initial ś, without showing the insertion of t. २.१.९. ङणनेभ्यः कटतैः शषसेषु । Whitney (2.9). E, F (orig): ङणनेमः°. I: 10. O adds a daṇḍa after ङणनेभ्यः. Translation: After [final] ṅ, ṇ, and n, [respectively] the [sounds] k, ṭ, and t [are inserted], before ś, ṣ, and s. Note: Whitney says: “The form of this rule is a little ambiguous, since we might be left by it to query whether, for instance, after ṅ, was to be inserted k before ś, ṭ before ṣ, and t before s, or only k before all the three sibi- lants - in other words, whether the transition-sound should adapt itself to the character of the following or of the preceding letter. The commentator either does not notice, or does not deign to relieve, this difficulty; he offers no expla- nation of the rule, and, in the instances which he cites, the manuscript persis- tently omits to write the transition-sound.” While the manuscripts are unclear because of the lack of writing the transition-sound, the commentary does clear one doubt. The one-to-one matching (yathāsaṅkhya) does not work across the board. The commentary does clearly indicate that a final ṅ may be followed by ś, ṣ, and s. The same holds true for final ṇ and n. As far as the CA rule is concerned, Whitney also correctly assumes: “For phonetic reasons, however, it cannot be doubted that the latter is determined by the preceding letter, and that after ṅ is to be uttered a k, after ṇ a ṭ, and after n a t, before all the sibilants.” However, it is not clear whether such an assumption was widely shared by all the different grammatical traditions. For instance, Pāṇini treats ṅ and ṇ differently from n. P.8.3.28 (ङ्णोः कुक्टुक् शरि) says that, after ṅ and ṇ, optionally, the augments kUK and ṭUK are respectively inserted, before ś, ṣ, and ś. Then P.8.3.30 (नश्च) says that, after n, the augment dhUṬ (dh>t) is optionally inserted before s. Finally,

अध्याय २, पाद १ 272 P.8.3.31 (शि तुक्) says that, after n, the augment tUK is inserted before ś. None of these rules cover the case of a word final n being followed by an ini- tial ṣ. On the other hand, the CAB clearly offers an attested case of a word-fi- nal n followed by an initial ṣ, e.g. śītān+ṣaṭ (AV 8.9.17). The manuscripts of the AV are irregular at best in showing these tran- sitional sounds, and the manuscripts of the CAB do not show them at all. The logic of this phenomenon is elucidated by Whitney as follows: “The insertion of these tenues after the nasals is a purely physical phenomenon, and one which is very natural, and liable to occur in any one’s pronunciation. There is to be made, in each case, a double transition in utterance: from the so- nant nasal to the surd oral emission, and the former is made an instant earlier than then latter, if the nasal resonance is stopped just before, instead of exactly at the same time with, the transfer of the organs to the position of the sibilant, a tenues of the same position with the nasal becomes audible. It is, as already remarked under i. 99 (= CA 1.4.8), the counterpart of the nasal yama, asserted by the Hindu phonetists to be heard between a mute and following nasal. It is also closely analogous with the conversion of nś into ñch, as will be pointed out below (under rule 17 = CA 2.1.17).” The artificial examples cited under this rule by the CAB are comparable in general to examples found in the KV on P.8.3.28-30. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ङणनेभ्यः कटतैर्व्यवधानं भवति शष- सेषु परतः । ‘प्रत्यङ्क्शे(H, N: ङ्शे)ते’ (not in AV)। ‘प्रत्यङ्क्षण्डे’ (H, N: °ङ्गेते) (not in AV)। ‘प्रत्यङ्क्सा(H, N: °ङ्सा)ये’ (not in AV)। ‘गण्ट्शे(H, N: °ण्शे)ते’ (not in AV)। ‘गण्ट्ष(H, N: °ण्ष)ण्डे’ (not in AV)। ‘गण्ट्सा(H, N: °ण्सा)ये’ (not in AV)। ‘षडा॑हुः शी॒तान्त्ष(H, N: °न्ष)डु॑ मा॒सः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१७)। ‘तान्त्स॒(H, N: °न्स)त्यौजाः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.३६.१)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) points out that this rule is not followed by the Vulgate mss. for the AV. From this, and such other facts, he concludes “(1) that CA records saṃdhis for the Śaunaka AV; (2) that these are not observed by the Vulgate mss.; (3) that the Vulgate does not repre- sent the Śaunaka śākhā, but some other.” Surya Kanta, fully convinced of his own conclusions, does not notice the fact that the sandhis prescribed by the CA

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका273 are not applied by the manuscripts of the CAB to the very examples which are supposed to illustrate those sandhis. Whitney himself has noted this fact many times, and the present edition also makes that amply clear. Thus, if the manu- scripts of the very CA and its commentary fail to apply the sandhis taught by this very text, so could, and probably did, the manuscripts of the very Śaunakīya AV itself. This happened most probably because the Śaunakīya tradition itself underwent significant change, as evidenced by the APR. Surya Kanta forgets to notice the significance of the fact that a significant number of manuscripts of the CA also contain the text of the APR, and the manuscript tradition has consistently treated both of these texts as belonging to the Śaunakīya tradition. See the manuscripts B, M, P, VR, and V (APR, Introduc- tion, p. 1-3). All these manuscripts have also been used for the present edition of the CA. The manuscripts, as the final colophons show, were copied and meant to be studied by the Brahmins who did not distinguish between the śākhās of these two texts, and who were all followers of the Śaunakīya AV. For instance, the final colophon for the Jyotiṣagrantha included in the mss. B used by Surya Kanta (ibid, p. 1) says: एवं शौनकशाखायां ब्रह्मवेदस्याङ्गं ज्योतिषग्रंथं ब्रह्मकाश्यपानुवादं समाप्तम्. The same manuscript contains the texts of CA and APR, and the whole mss. was meant for the study of a Brahmin named Br̥haspatiji in the Pañcoli family from Anahilapurapattana. Descendants of this Pañcoli family are followers of the Śaunakīya AV till this very day, and the last few surviving reciters of the Śaunakīya AV come from this family. Concerning this rule, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., Intro., p. cxxiv) says: “Pr. ii.9 ordains that between ṅ, ṇ, n and ś, ṣ, s respectively, k, ṭ, t be in all cases introduced; the first two thirds of the rule never have an opportunity to make themselves good, as the text offers no instance of a conjunction of ṅ with ś or of ṇ with ṣ; that f final n with initial s, however, is very frequent, and the t has always been introduced by us. The usage of the mss. is slightly varying [‘exceedingly irregular,’ says W. in his note to the present rule of CA]: there is not a case perhaps where some one of them does not make the insertion, and perhaps hardly one in which they all do so without variation.” On AV 6.51.1, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 319) remarks: “The Atharvan reading, ac- cording to the Prāt. phonetic rule ii.9 (= CA 2.1.9), ought to be pratyáṅk before a following ś; but (as explained in the note to that rule) the mss. read simple ṅ, and both printed texts adopt it.” २.१.१०. नकारस्य शकारे ञकारः ।

अध्याय २, पाद १ 274 Whitney (2.10). A, B: नकारः for ञकारः. O: यकारः for ञकारः. P: शकार for शकारे. Translation: Before ś, n is replaced with ñ. Note: This rule needs to be understood in conjunction with CA (2.1.17: तवर्गीयाच्छकारः शकारस्य), which changes ś to ch, after a dental stop. The examples as cited by the commentator show the change of -n+ś- to -ñ+ch-. These two rules raise interesting questions as regards the order of their appli- cation. However, such theoretical questions are not discussed by the com- mentary. The dilemmas, however, are transparent. If we apply CA (2.1.10) first, and change the n to ñ, then we cannot apply CA (2.1.17), because that rule changes ś to ch after a dental stop, and ñ is not a dental stop. On the other hand, if we first apply CA (2.1.17), and change ś to ch after n, then we can no longer apply CA (2.1.10) which changes n to ñ before ś, and there is no longer a ś after n. Also see Note under CA (2.1.17). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य

नकारस्य शकारे परतः ञकारो भवति । ‘अ॒स्माञ्छ॑त्रूय॒तीम॒भि’ (अ.वे. ३.१.३)। ‘दि॒वि षञ्छु॒क्रः’ (अ.वे. १८.४.५९)। २.१.११. चवर्गीये घोषवति । Whitney (2.11). A, B: °र्ग्री°. Translation: [The final n changes to ñ, also] before a voiced [stop] belonging to the c-series. Note: As Whitney points out: “That is to say, before j; since jh, as already noticed, never occurs, and ñ is never found as initial.” The exclusion of voiceless stops c and ch is important, because the final n behaves differently before these sound, cf. devān+ca > devā̃śca / devāṃśca. The manuscripts of the AV do not consistently show this change, and, instead of the expected ñ, sometimes we find an anusvāra, or a dental n. For example, on AV (1.33.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 33) notes that only about half of the mss. carry out the prescribed sandhi. The Whitney-Roth edition generally has an anusvāra. S.P. Pandit’s edition and the VVRI edition read -an j- without ap- plying this sandhi rule.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका275 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चवर्गीये परतः घोषवति नकारस्य ञ- कारो भवति। ‘अ॒व॒पश्य॒ञ्जना॑(H: जाता)नाम्’ (अ.वे. १. ३३.२)। ‘तृ॒णहा॒ञ्जन॑म्’ (अ.वे. ५.८.७)। ‘प्रै॒ष्यञ्ज॑नमिव’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.१४)। ‘वि॒वा॒हाञ्ज्ञा॒तीन्’ (अ.वे. १२.५. ४४)। Note: The CAB here lists the first four instances out of a total list of 10 instances found in the APR (138). The examples occur exactly in the same order. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 58) mistakenly cites CA (2.2, from Whitney’s edition), instead of the present rule. २.१.१२. टवर्गीये णकारः । Whitney (2.12). Translation: [The final n is changed to] ṇ before a [voiced stop] belonging to the ṭ-series. Note: As Whitney points out, no lingual stop is found at the begin- ning of “any word in the Atharvan, any more than in the other Vedas, and this rule is as unnecessary as is the inclusion of ṇ along with the other nasals in rule 9 of this chapter (= CA 2.1.9), and as is more than one rule or part of a rule in that which is to follow: such specifications are made merely for the sake of a theoretical completeness.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - टवर्गीये परतः घोषवति नकारस्य ण- कारो भवति। ‘भवाण्डी(H, N: र्णी)यते’ (not in AV)। ‘महाण्डी(H, N: र्णी)यते’ (not in AV)। Note: The readings भवाण्डीयते and महाण्डीयते are based on Whitney’s conjectures which are clearly preferable to the reading in the manuscripts, which as they stand cannot even illustrate this rule. These are clearly artificial examples, not attested in the known text of the AV. However, with respect to these examples, Surya Kanta does not raise his claim that these instances may have occurred in the genuine text of the Śaunakīya recension.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 276 The corruptions भवार्णीयते and महार्णीयते in both the mss. for the original भवाण्डीयते and महाण्डीयते are comparable to the corruption of खट्वैडका to खट्वैरगा on CA 3.2.27. These corruptions, which seem to change ḍ to r, seem to be indi- cations of the probable Rajasthani origin of the manuscripts, cf. Ernest Bender (1992: 90-91) २.१.१३. तकारस्य शकारलकारयोः परसस्थानः । Whitney (2.13). A, B, D: °परमःस्थानः. Ha, J, M, N, P: °परसःस्थानः. Translation: Before ś and l, t is changed to a sound sharing the same point of articulation as the following sound. Note: Whitney points out that the sandhi of t with ś is not complete without rule CA (2.1.17), which changes ś to ch after a dental stop. The term parasasthāna refers to a sound which has the same point of articulation as the following sound. In comparison with other treatises, we know that a final t is changed to c before ś, and to l before l. The first change is more obvious than the second, because t and l share the same sthāna ‘point of articulation,’ i.e. both are dental (dantya), and hence it is not clear why this rule should change a t to l before l. Since, t and l are already sasthāna of each other, the formulation of the rule is basically faulty. Pāṇini’s formulation averts such a difficulty by using the term parasavarṇa instead of the term para- sasthāna, cf. P.8.4.60 (तोर्लि) with parasavarṇaḥ continuing from P.8.4.58. The term sasthāna simply refers to the sharing of a common point of articulation, while the term savarṇa, as defined by P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्), refers to those sounds which share the same point of articulation (sthāna) as well as the internal effort (prayatna). While t and l are sasthāna ‘having a common point of articulation,’ they are not savarṇa ‘having a common point of articulation and internal effort.’ Pāṇini asks us to replace a dental stop, before l, with a sound which is parasavarṇa. The only sounds which share the same point of articulation and internal effort with l, are l itself and its nasal variety, i.e. l̃. Thus, a final t is changed to l, and a final n is changed to l̃. Neither the CAB, nor Whitney, show any awareness of these theoretical difficulties. This also raises a significant question about how much of this text is pre-Pāṇinian. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तकारस्य शकारलकारयोः परसस्थानो भवति । ‘उच्छि॑ष्टे॒ नाम॑’ (अ.वे. ११.७.१)। ‘घृ॒तादु- ल्लु॑प्त॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५.२८.१४)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका277 Note: The manuscripts of the AV, as well as those of the CA, most often do not fully observe this sandhi as it relates to the juncture of t and ś, and write ch for cch. २.१.१४. चटवर्गयोश्च । Whitney (2.14). A, B: चटर्गीयोश्च. Translation: Before the consonants of the c-series and ṭ- series, [a final t is changed to a consonant which shares the same point of articulation as the following consonant]. Note: This rule also shows that the CA makes certain assumptions which are not brought out by the CAB. One such assumption is that out of the possible substitutes, one selects a replacement which is closest to the original in terms of phonetic features. This principle is stated by Pāṇini in P.1.1.50 (स्थानेऽन्तरतमः), and CA (1.4.4: आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः). For example, when a final t is followed by c, we are told that t changes to a consonant which is parasasthāna ‘shares the same point of articulation as the following sound.’ The sounds i, e, c-series, and ś, all share the same point of articulation. They are all tālavya ‘palatal.’ The principle given in CA (1.4.4) tells us that we replace t with c, and not with some other sound. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चटवर्गयोः परतः तकारस्य पर(स)- स्थानो भवति। ‘उच्च॑ तिष्ठ’ (अ.वे. २.६.२)। ‘यज्जा॒- मयः॑’ (अ.वे. १४.२.६१)। ‘अग्निचिट्टीकते’ (not in AV)। ‘सोमसुड्डीयते’ (not in AV)। Note: The fact that there are no examples attested in the Vulgate of the AV for illustrating a t followed by a retroflex stop is taken by Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) as a possible indication that the Vulgate is not a genuinely Śaunakīya recension, and that a genuinely Śaunakīya recension may have contained such examples. On the other hand, I believe that Whitney is probably correct in suggesting that a rule like this is perhaps an indication of this text straying occasionally into the requirements of a general grammar for Sanskrit, and he points to similar examples in the commentaries on P.8.4.40-41

अध्याय २, पाद १ 278 (स्तोः श्चुना श्चुः, ष्टुना ष्टुः). The example अग्निचिट्टीकते is actually found in the KV on P.8.4.41. २.१.१५. ताभ्यां समानपदे तवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसस्थानः । Whitney (2.15). A, B, D, J, M, P: °चवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसःस्थानः. O combines a portion of this rule with CA 2.1.17, and omits CA 2.1.16: ताभ्यां समानपदे तवर्गी- याछकारःश्छकारस्य. Translation: Within the same word, after these [= stops of the c-series, i.e. palatal stops, and the ṭ-series, i.e. retroflex stops], a member of the t-series [i.e. a dental stop] is replaced with a sound which shares the same point of articulation as the previous [palatal or retroflex stop]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ताभ्यां चटवर्गाभ्यां समानपदे तवर्गी- यस्य पूर्वसस्थानो भवति । ‘मू॒ढा अ॑मित्राः’ (अ.वे. ६.६७. २)। ‘तेष॑ां वो अ॒ग्निमू॑ढाना॒म्’ (अ.वे. ६.६७.२)। चवर्गीया- न्नकारस्य च । ‘य॒ज्ञेन॑ य॒ज्ञम्’ (अ.वे. ७.५.१)। ‘सोमा॑य॒ राज्ञे॑’ (अ.वे. २.१३.२)। ‘सोम॑स्य॒ राज्ञः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६८. १)। Note: Whitney points out that all the cases of this rule illustrated by the commentary fall in the category of internal sandhi which results only if one is interested in the derivation of the word mūḍha, and not its relationships with the preceding or the succeeding word, which is the proper area for a Prāti- śākhya. The CAB on CA (1.1.2) says: सन्ध्यपद्याविति किमर्थम् । ‘लीढ’मित्यत्र हो ढत्वम् (cf. ‘हो ढः,’ पा. ८.२.३१)। पर(H, N: °द, Whitney: °र)चतुर्थत्वम् (cf. ‘झषस्तथोर्धोऽधः,’ पा. ८.२.४०)। ष्टुना ष्टुत्वम् (cf. ‘ष्टुना ष्टुः,’ पा. ८.४.४१)। ढो ढे लोपो (cf. ‘ढो ढे लोपः,’ पा. ८.३.१३)दीर्घत्वमिति (cf. ‘ढ्रलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घोऽणः,’ पा. ६.३.१११) वैयाकरणेन वक्तव्यम् । The word mūḍha is derived in the same way, where the root muh is followed by the past participle affix -ta. The CAB, and perhaps the CA, seem to assume a derivational process analogous to the Pāṇinian process cited in the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका279 commentary passage above. The h of the root muh is replaced with ḍh before the affix -ta. Then the present CA rule changes t of -ta, coming after ḍh, to ḍh, giving us the stage muḍh+ḍha. The present CA rule does not go beyond this stage. According to Pāṇinian derivation, however, ḍh is deleted before ḍh by P.8.3.13 (ढो ढे लोपः), and the preceding vowel is lengthened by P.6.3.111 (ढ्रलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घोऽणः). Whitney is, however, correct is saying that such a derivational process does not truly concern a Prātiśākhya, a point also made by the CAB on CA (1.1.2). Whitney also suggests: “The only practical application of the precept is one which is not recognized, or at least not illustrated, by the commentator; namely, to those cases in which an initial s followed by a t or th is, by later rules (ii. 90 = CA 2.4.10 etc.), converted to ṣ : the following dental then be- comes by this rule a lingual.” While the change indicated by Whitney does in- deed take place in forms like anuṣṭhita, it cannot take place by the present CA rule, because the present CA rule strictly applies to a dental stop which follows a palatal or a retroflex stop, and not something that follows any palatal or retro- flex sound. The change indicated by Whitney does, however, take place by the following CA rule, i.e. CA (2.1.16). In any case, this rule, along with several successive rules, illustrates the relatively less common process of regressive assimilation. Generally, Sanskrit shows progressive assimilation. २.१.१६. षकारान्नानापदेऽपि । Whitney (2.16). F, I: °रांतांनाना°. O omits this rule. Translation: After an ṣ, even in a different word [i.e. even across a word-boundary], [a dental stop is replaced with a sound which has the same point of articulation as the preceding ṣ]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - षकारान्तान्नानापदे अपिशब्दात्समान- पदेऽपि तवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसस्थानो भवति । ‘ष॒ष्टिः’ (अ.वे. ५. १५.६)। ‘षण्णवतिः’ (not in AV, ‘षण्णवत्यै,’ तै.सं. ७.२. १५.१, काठकसं. ४२.५)। Note: Whitney says that the example ṣaṣṭiḥ properly ‘belongs under the preceding rule.’ This is not quite true. The preceding rule, as pointed out earlier, applies only to dental stops which follow palatal or retroflex stops, and

अध्याय २, पाद १ 280 not which follow palatal or retroflex sounds across the board. In any case, an example like ṣaṣṭiḥ constitutes an example of internal sandhi, which concerns the process of word-derivation, which strictly speaking is not the concern of a Prātiśākhya. However, as Whitney indicates on the preceding rule, one can think of a ‘word-internal’ application for this rule, where the initial s of a root is changed to ṣ because of the preceding vowel across the word-boundary. The dental stop following such an ṣ then changes to a retroflex stop, e.g. anu+ sthita > anu+ṣthita > anu+ṣṭhita. Numerous examples of this kind can be found in the text of the Atharvan. The example ṣaṇṇavatiḥ is offered in the KV on P. 8.4.42 (न पदान्ताट्टोर- नाम्), to illustrate the Vārttika: अनाम्नवतिनगरीणामिति वाच्यम्. Since the example ṣaṇṇavatiḥ is not attested in the AV, what would be a proper AV example? In this case, Whitney rightly points out: “The precept was evidently only intended for such combinations as bahiṣ ṭe (i.3.1), in which, by the rules contained in the fourth section of this chapter, an original final s becomes lingualized, and the following t is assimilated to it.” २.१.१७. तवर्गीयाच्छकारः शकारस्य । Whitney (2.17). A, B (corr), D, J: तवर्गीयाः°. Translation: After a member of the t-series [i.e. a dental stop], ś is replaced with ch. Note: This rule works in conjunction with rules 2.1.10 and 2.1.13 above. See Notes on those rules for problems regarding the mutual relations between these rules as formulated. Whitney also points out: “This rule, taken in connection with rules 10 (= CA 2.1.10) and 13 (= CA 2.1.13), above, de- termines the form to be assumed by the combinations t+ś and n+ś. Exception may fairly be taken, however, to the method in which the change is taught. By the other rules referred to, t and n are to become c and ñ before ś: and if those rules are first applied, there will be no dental mutes for ś to follow; while, if the present rule be first applied, the others are rendered wholly or in part superflu- ous, by the non-occurrence of ś after t and n. In the case of t there comes in the still farther difficulty that rule 6 of this chapter (= CA 2.1.6) has converted it into th, so that a part of rule 13 is thereby also rendered incapable to applica- tion. These are incongruencies such as the authors of the Prātiśākhyas are very seldom guilty of. What is the intention of our treatise is, indeed, sufficiently clear.” The kind of problems pointed out by Whitney in the application of CA rules have been handled with far greater sophistication in the Pāṇinian system

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका281 with devices like a) sthānivadbhāva ‘treating a substitute as if it had some of the same properties as the original,’ b) rule ordering and well-defined proce- dures for conflict-resolution and priority, and c) treating a rule or it result as if it is not in effect for some other rules (asiddha). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तवर्गीयादुत्तरस्य शकारस्य छकारो भवति । ‘दे॒वाञ्छ्लोकः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३३)। ‘अ॒स्माञ्छ॑त्रू- य॒तीम॒भि’ (अ.वे. ३.१.३)। ‘दि॒वि षञ्छु॒क्रः’ (अ.वे. १८. ४.५९)। Note: Whitney points out: “The commentator cites examples only of the combination of n and ś. … As an example illustrative of the other part of the rule, we may take ārāc charavyāḥ (i.19.1).” Whitney further points out that the manuscripts “with hardly an excep- tion, write simply ch, instead of cch.” While this observation is beyond doubt, Whitney draws some debatable conclusions: “This orthography (i.e. ch, rather than cch) is also, to my apprehension, a truer representation of the actual pho- netic result of combining t with ś. That these sounds fuse together into a ch is very strong evidence that the utterance of the Sanskrit surd palatals did not dif- fer materially from that of our ch (in church etc.); and I conceive that the con- stant duplication of the ch and jh (wherever the latter occurs) between two vowels is to be looked upon simply as an indication of the heaviness of those consonants, and of their effect to make the preceding vowel long by position.” I think Whitney seems to overlook the fact that the representation cch is not a mere orthographic representation, but that the processes of syllabication would require that the initial c be part of the previous syllable, with the next syllable beginning with ch. Such a syllabic division was obligatory in Sanskrit, espe- cially, if the previous syllable had a short vowel. In NIA languages like Hindi and Marathi, however, we can have a ch preceded by a short vowel forming a light syllable in words like bichānā > bi-chā-nā. In Sanskrit, there is no reason to believe that ch was always a heavy consonant. After long vowels and sen- tence-initially, one has no reason to assume that ch must be a heavy consonant. Assuming the compound nature of ch, Whitney says: “The conversion of nś into ñch, on the supposition of the compound nature of the palatal, as made up of a mute and a sibilant element, would be almost precisely analogous with that of ns into nts, as taught in rule 9, above, and would be readily and simply explainable as a phonetic process.” While there is indeed some com- monality between these two cases, one must note that the Sanskrit tradition

अध्याय २, पाद १ 282 treated ch as a single sound, while ts was always treated as a consonant cluster. In the cluster ts, after the initial closure for t, one has the continuant s. On the other hand, ch is unlike n+c+ś, in that ch has aspiration as part of it release, but does not have the continuant feature of ś. Such a distinction allows ts to be split in a syllabic division as -t+s-. Such a division is not available for ch. २.१.१८. लोप उदः स्थास्तम्भोः सकारस्य । Whitney (2.18). Ha, Na: उदस्थाः°. J, M, Hb, Nb, P: उदस्थास्तंभोः°. E, F: लोपोदँस्थाः°. A, B: लोपे उदस्थाः स्तंभोः°. O: लोपोदँस्थास्तंभोसकारस्य. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - लोपो भवति उद उत्तरयोः स्थास्त- म्भोः सकारस्य। ‘मा घोषा॒ उत्थुः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.५२.२)। ‘तत॒स्त्वोत्था॑पयामसि’ (अ.वे. १०.१.२९)। ‘उत्था॑पय॒ सी- द॑तः’ (अ.वे. १२.३.३०)। ‘स॒त्येनोत्त॑भिता॒’ (अ.वे. १४.१. १)। Note: Referring to the form utthuḥ in AV (7.52.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 422) remarks: “SSP. strangely reads, with the comm. and the majority of his authorities, and with part of ours (P.?O.R.), ut sthur in c, against both general grammar and the Prātiśākhya (ii.18; its commentary quotes this passage as an illustration of the rule).” In all the cases of ut+sthā cited by the commentary, the Padapāṭha clearly retains the s of sthā. However, as Whitney points out: “Wherever, however, the preposition receives the accent, and enters into a more intimate combination with the root, as in the participle útthita, the pada-text (by iv. 62 = CA 4.2.16) does not separate the compound, or restore the original s, but reads the same form which appears in saṃhitā. Of this kind is also the only example of the root stambh combined with the prepo- sition ud which our text presents, viz. satyeno ’ttabhitā (xiv.1.1), where the pada reads úttabhitā, and not út-stabhitā.” Also compare this rule with P.8.4.61 (उदः स्थास्तम्भोः पूर्वस्य). The CA rule is closer to Pāṇini as compared to other Prātiśākhyas, as Whitney points out: “The Vāj. Pr. (iv. 95) notices the loss of s from the root stambh, but, as Weber remarks with surprise, omits all mention of sthā. The Taitt. Pr. (v. 14) includes these cases in a more general rule, that s is dropped when preceded by ud and followed by a consonant.” २.१.१९. रेफस्य रेफे । Whitney (2.19).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका283 Translation: R [is deleted] before r. Note: As Whitney notes: “The r which is thus dropped must itself, of course, be the product of euphonic processes taught elsewhere (ii. 42, 43 = CA 2.2.3-4). The protraction of a preceding short vowel when an r is thus dropped is prescribed in a later rule (iii. 20 = CA 3.1.20).” However, the CA rules must be clearly contrasted with Pāṇinian rules P.8.3.13 (ढो ढे लोपः) and P.6.3. 111 (ढ्रलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घोऽणः), which prescribe additionally a deletion of a ḍh before ḍh, and the lengthening of the preceding vowel. The CAB on CA (1.1.2) knows these Pāṇinian rules, and the same commentary on CA (2.1.15), if not CA (2.1.15) itself, seems to presuppose such rules. See Notes on CA (1.1.2) and CA (2.1.15). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफस्य रेफे परतः लोपो भवति । ‘श॒रदः॑ पुरू॒ची(ः) रा॒यः’ (अ.वे. २.१३.३)। ‘पुना रक्तं वासः’ (not in known Vedic texts, quoted in the KV on P.1.3. 14)। ‘पुना॑ रू॒पाणि॑’ (अ.वे. १.२४.४)। ‘ज॒घ्नू रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ४.३७.१)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ८.३.२६)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्षः॑’ (अ.वे. १२.३.४३)। Note: The example पुना रक्तं वासः cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV and is actually not found in the known Vedic literature. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. However, the fact that it occurs in the KV may perhaps mean that it could have been taken by our commentary from a gram- matical source like the KV. २.१.२०. स्पर्शादुत्तमादनुत्तमस्यानुत्तमे । Whitney (2.20). Translation: After a last member [of a stop-series, i.e. a nasal stop], and before a non-last [member of a stop-series, i.e. non-nasal stop], a non-last [member of a stop-series, i.e. a non- nasal stop, is deleted].

अध्याय २, पाद १ 284 Note: This rule is interesting in that it does not seem to apply to the transformation of the words given in the Padapāṭha to their Saṃhitā versions, or vice versa, and hence it does not fit a strict definition of the purpose of a Prātiśākhya. To make sense of the inclusion of such rules, one may perhaps propose that the CA is trying to clearly distinguish its recitational practice from the norms of generic Sanskrit, and from other traditions, cf. Whitney: “Neither of the other known Prātiśākhyas teaches the same omission, or even notices it as prescribed by any authority.” Concerning the practice taught by this rule, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol. I., Intro., p. cxxv) says: “Abbreviation of the consonant-groups: as in paṅkti and the like. – By ii.20 (= CA 2.1.20) a non- nasal mute coming in the course of word-formation between a nasal and a non- nasal is dropped: so paṅti; chintam and rundhi in stead of [paṅkti], chinttam and runddhi; etc. The manuscripts observe this rule quite consistently, although not without exceptions; and it has been uniformly followed in the edition. At xii.1.40, anuprayuṅktām iaccidental exception; and here, for once, the mss. happen to agree in retaining the k. !Cthe Hibernicisms stren’th, len’th, etc.∀” Note that the comments enclosed between the L-brackets ‘!’ and ‘∀’ are added by Lanman. On the other hand, the VVRI edition does not follow this rule, and maintains the k/g in its readings. This rule also needs to be contrasted with CA (2.1.9: ङणनानां कटतैः शषसेषु), which prescribes: “After [final] ṅ, ṇ, and n, [respectively] the [sounds] k, ṭ, and t [are inserted], before ś, ṣ, and s.” While CA (2.1.9) has parallels elsewhere, the present rule does not. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्पर्शात् उत्तमात् अनुत्तमस्य स्पर्शस्य अनुत्तमे परतः स्पर्शे लोपो भवति । ‘पङ्ति(H, N: ङ्क्ति)- रत्र’ (not in AV)। ‘पाङ्तं॒(H, N: ङ्क्तं) छन्दः॑’ (अ.वे. १२. ३.१०)। ‘स॒पत्ना॑न्मे भङ्धि॒ (H, N: भवति)’ (अ.वे. १०.३. १३)। अनुत्तम इति किमर्थम् । ‘तस्या॑ वा॒युर्व॒त्त्सः(H, N: त्सः)’ (अ.वे. ४.३९.४)। ‘उत्त्सो॑(H, N: त्सो) वा॒ तत्त्र॒(H, N: त्र)’ (अ.वे. ६.१०६.१)। ‘अ॒प्प्स॒(H, N: प्स)रसः॑ सध॒मादं॑ मदन्ति’ (अ.वे. १४.२.३४)। ‘नु॒दाम॑ एन॒मप॑ रुद्ध्मः(H: ध्सः, N: धाः)’ (अ.वे. १२.३.४३)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका285 Note: The deletion taught by this rule is not practiced by the mss. of the CAB. The consonant groups as assumed in the counter-examples are not seen either in the manuscripts of the AV, nor in those of the CAB. Also the counter-examples are not chosen with proper care in that several of them con- tain multiple violations of the conditions at a time, rather than illustrating strictly the single condition referred to by the query अनुत्तम इति किमर्थम्. In the text of the commentary above, I have given the examples with the consonant clusters as expressly intended by the commentary, and noted the manuscript readings which do not actually illustrate the intended clusters. २.१.२१. स्वराद्यवयोः पदान्तयोः । Whitney (2.21). I: 20. Translation: After a vowel, word-final y and v [are deleted]. Note: As Whitney points out: “This rule applies, on the one hand, to the y and v of the syllables ay, av, āy, āv (the latter, however, being excepted by the following rule), into which, by iii. 40 (= CA 3.2.17), e, o, ai, and au are converted before a vowel; and, on the other hand, to the y into which, by ii. 41 (= CA 2.2.2), visarjanīya theoretically passes before an initial vowel.” I object to the word ‘theoretically’ used by Whitney. While it is true that the CA seems to demand unconditional deletion of a y derived from a visarjanīya, and, there- fore, this y becomes a seemingly theoretical entity, other schools were not so categorical about this deletion, and hence this y could appear in the final result, cf. KV on P.8.3.19 (लोपः शाकल्यस्य) says: शाकल्यग्रहणं विभाषार्थम् । तेन यदापि लघुप्रयत्नतरो न भवत्यादेशस्तदापि व्योः पक्षे श्रवणं भवति. Also contrast the fact that such a deletion takes place, according to Pāṇini, before aŚ, i.e. vowels and voiced consonants. The CA rule is a statement of unconditional deletion. In any case, this procedure was widely disputed, and Whitney records the wide spectrum of views in the traditional phonetic literature concerning these disputes. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरादुत्तरयोः यकारवकारयोः पदान्त- योर्लोपो भवति । ‘क अा॑स॒ञ्जन्याः॒ के व॒राः’ (अ.वे. ११.८. १)। ‘उ॒ष्णेन॑ वाय उद॒केनेहि॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अ॒स्या इ॒च्छन्न॒ग्रुवै॒ पति॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.६०.१)। ‘स उ॑ ए॒व म॑हाय॒मः’ (अ.वे. १३.४.५)। ‘ता इ॒मा आपः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१५.७)।

अध्याय २, पाद १ 286 Note: While the CAB quotes asyā icchan to show that there is no re- combination, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 327) points out that “the meter shows that the irregular combination asye ’cchan requires to be made, and the Anukr. apparently winks at it.” २.१.२२. नाकाराद्वकारस्य । Whitney (2.22). A, B, D, P: नकारा°. Translation: [However], [a word-final] v occurring after ā is not [deleted]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नाकारात् उत्तरस्य वकारस्य लोपो भवति । ‘द्वावि॒मौ वाताै॑ वातः’ (अ.वे. ४.१३.२)। ‘इ॒न्द्र॒- वा॒यू उ॒भावि॒ह’ (अ.वे. ३.२०.६)। ‘उ॒भावि॑न्द्रा॒ग्नी आ भ॑र- ताम्’ (अ.वे. ५.७.६)। Note: Whitney says: “This rule is uniformly observed in the Sanhitā of the Atharvan, excepting in a couple of cases in book xix, which book the Prātiśākhya does not recognize as forming part of the Atharvan text: these are pādā ucyete (xix.6.5), and citrā imā vr̥ṣabhau (xix.13.1).” One cannot discount the possibility that the 19th book represents a somewhat different linguistic tra- dition and constitutes a relatively late addition to the rest of the books. How- ever, note that the Padapāṭha does not render citrā of the Saṃhitā with citrau as Whitney seems to assume, but leaves it as citrā. If such be the case, then it would not come under the scope for the present rule. २.१.२३. गविष्टौ गवेषण इति च । Whitney (2.23). O: गविष्ठौ°. Translation: Also, [there is no deletion of the word-final v in the forms] gaviṣṭau [< go+iṣṭau] and gaveṣaṇaḥ [< go+eṣaṇaḥ]. Note: In the two cases listed in the rule, the Padapāṭha breaks down the compounds as indicated in the brackets.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका287 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - गविष्टौ गवेषण इति च न वकारस्य लोपो भवति । ‘इषु॑मन्तं॒ गवि॑ष्टौ’ (अ.वे. ४.२४.५)। ‘ग॒वे- ष॑णः॒ सह॑मानः’ (अ. वे. ५.२०.११)। Note: Whitney says: “Other like cases, as gavāśir and gaviṣ, occur in the twentieth book of the text, but with that book the Prātiśākhya has nothing to do.” APR (155), which seems to be referring to our CA rule, also teaches that in gaviṣṭau and gaveṣaṇaḥ the v is not elided. Surya Kanta makes a case that making such a rule which can apply to the Saṃhitā text was originally not the function of the APR, which was originally supposed to describe only the peculiarities of the Pada text, and that such rules were added later to it. On the other hand, he argues that the CA was from the very beginning a treatise deal- ing with the conversion of the Padas into Saṃhitā, and that a rule such as the present one is more genuinely suited to it. See: APR, Introduction, pp. 25-26. २.१.२४. लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य । Whitney (2.24). A, B, D: °स्पृर्शं°. O: °स्पर्शां°. Translation: According to Śākaṭāyana, there is a weak ar- ticulation [of the word-final y and v discussed in the earlier rules], as regards the feature of contact [between the articulator and the point of articulation]. Note: As Whitney’s survey of the various texts shows, the doctrine ascribed to Śākaṭāyana here is offered as an option by most texts, and is occa- sionally ascribed to other scholars like Vātsapra. P.8.3.18 (व्योर्लघुप्रयत्नतरः शाक- टायनस्य) ascribes the same view to Śākaṭāyana, but uses a slightly different term: laghuprayatnataraḥ “relatively weaker articultory effort.” Pāṇini 8.3.19 (लोपः शाकल्यस्य) ascribes the deletion of final y and v to Śākalya. By default, it would seem that these sounds were neither deleted nor weakened, but were pronounced with the normal force in Pāṇini’s own school. This gives us a wide range of pronunciation for final y and v across the various dialects of Sanskrit. What is noteworthy, however, is that the view of deletion, which is ascribed by Pāṇini expressly to Śākalya, is the default view in CA. While it does care, for some reason, to record the view of Śākaṭāyana, it does not care to record the view of normal pronunciation of y and v. It should be noted that there is a close relationship of the CA tradition to the views expressed by

अध्याय २, पाद १ 288 Śākaṭāyana, cf. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.1.11-12) and the Notes on these rules. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - लेशवृत्तिर्भवति अधिस्पर्शं शाकटायन- स्य आचार्यस्य। ‘क अा॑स॒ञ्जन्याः॒ के व॒राः’ (अ.वे. ११.८. १)। ‘उ॒ष्णेन॑ वाय उद॒केनेहि॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अ॒स्या इ॒च्छन्न॒ग्रुवै॒ पति॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.६०.१)। ‘स उ॑ ए॒व म॑हाय॒मः’ (अ.वे. १३.४.५)। ‘ता इ॒मा आपः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१५.७)। २.१.२५. पुमो मकारस्य स्पर्शेऽघोषेऽनूष्मपरे विसर्जनीयोऽपुंश्चादिषु । Whitney (2.25). E, F: पूँ for पुं. J, M: °यो अपुं°. O: °पूंश्चा°. Translation: Before a voiceless stop not followed by a spi- rant, the m of pum is changed to a visarjanīya [i.e. ḥ], except in puṃśca etc. Note: Whitney’s frustration with the rule and the commentary is manifest in his comments: “This is a rule very hard to get along with. In the first place, it is altogether unnecessary and uncalled for, since of all the words to which it is intended to apply, but a single one, puṃścalī, is found in the Atharvan text, and that one is written by the pada-text precisely as in saṃhitā, and so requires no explanation from the Prātiśākhya.” Besides the fact that the rule seems to step into the un-Prātiśākhyan ter- ritory of general grammatical derivation, the condition apuṃścādiṣu creates a number of problems. The first problem is that the form puṃśca already seems to show the operation of the rule. If so, then what is being excluded by saying apuṃścādiṣu? The CAB offers puṃścora as a counter-example. However, as Whitney agonizes: “But puṃścora, ‘he-thief,’ is as regular an instance of the application of the rule as puṃskāmā or puṃścalī; nor does it seem possible to find in apuṃścādiṣu itself any form which constitutes an exception to the pre- vious specifications. I can only conjecture that the reading is corrupt, and was corrupt before the commentator set himself at work upon it, and that his expla- nation was as unintelligible to himself as it is to us. The specification may have been intended for such words as puṃkhyāna, which constitutes an actual exception to the rule, and it is cited as such in Böhtlingk’s note to Pāṇini viii.3.6, as from the Siddhānta-Kaumudī.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका289 It is now quite clear that apuṃścādiṣu is an ancient corruption. It is shared by all the manuscripts, and, as Whitney correctly assumes, it must have been there already when the author of the CAB attempted to explain the word. Whitney’s comment quoted above, led me to look for a possible emendation. Having looked at the shapes of the letters kh and c in Gupta and pre-Gupta scripts, it seems very likely that these two letters were confused, and a possible apuṃkhādiṣu was misread as apuṃścādiṣu. The expression apuṃkhādiṣu would not only exclude puṃkhyāna cited by Whitney, but also the relatively earlier expression puṃkha, which is traditionally etymologized as pum+kha [< pumāṃsaṃ khanati, pum+khan+Ḍa, etymology offered in Śabdakalpadruma, Vol. 3, p. 163]. Another possible reading is apuṃkṣādiṣu, which wouexclude cases like puṃkṣīraḥ and puṃkṣuraḥ. However, these examples are already taken care of by the exclusion anūṣmapare, and one would not need a separate exclu- sion to be stated. Therefore, the reading apuṃkhādiṣu seems to be a better emendation. Another word which fits in the same category as puṃkha is puṃkheṭa, which is analyzed by Roth-Böhtlingk (PW, Vol. 4, p. 752) as puṃs+khe ’ṭa, and explained as: “ein männlicher Planet, (ref:) Ind. St. 2,258, N.” Indeed the word puṃkha is at least as old as the epics, cf. Böhtlingk, PW, Vol. 4, p. 752, and, even though it is unattested in Vedic literature, it could have been on the mind of the author of the CA as an exception to the rule. It is also attested in Varāhopaniṣad (2.82, Yogopaniṣadaḥ, p. 482). However, this is a late Upaniṣad, and the verse containing this word is in the meter Vasanta- tilakā, a late classical meter. Whitney rightly suspects that the reading apuṃścādiṣu was corrupted from some now-unknown original before this commentary was written. On the other hand, his comment that this whole rule is probably an interpolation, because the word visarjanīya is repeated again in the following rule, is not jus- tified, since Whitney’s reading of CA 2.1.26: नकारस्य चटतवर्गेष्वघोषेष्वनूष्मपरेषु वि- सर्जनीयः is not supported by a single manuscript. By mistake, Whitney has taken the elaboration in the commentary to be the text of the rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पुमो मकारस्य स्पर्शे अघोषे अनूष्मपरे विसर्जनीयो भवति अपुंश्चादिषु । ‘पुंस्कामा’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुंस्पुत्रा’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुंश्चली’ (अ.वे. १५.२.१)। स्पर्श इति किमर्थम्। ‘पुंयानम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। अघोष इति किमर्थम् । ‘पुंदानम्’ (not in Vedic

अध्याय २, पाद १ 290 texts)। अनूष्मपरे इति किमर्थम् । ‘पुंक्षुरः’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुंक्षारः’ (not in Vedic texts)। अपुंश्चादिष्विति किमर्थम् । ‘पुंश्चोरः’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: Except for one, all the examples cited by the commentator are unattested in the AV. Many of these examples are found in the KV on P.8.3.6 (पुमः खय्यम्परे). The example puṃkṣāraḥ may be a corruption of puṃkṣīra which occurs in the KV on P.8.3.6. For puṃyānam and puṃścoraḥ, the Pe- tersburg Lexicon finds the only known attestations in the CAB on the present rule. २.१.२६. नकारस्य चटतवर्गेषु । Whitney (2.26): नकारस्य चटतवर्गेष्वघोषेष्वनूष्मपरेषु विसर्जनीयः. A, B, C, D, E, F, J, M, Na, O: °चटवर्गेषु°. P: °चटवर्ग्रेषु°. Translation: Before voiceless [stops] of the c-series, ṭ-series, and t-series [i.e. palatal, retroflex, or dental stops], [not fol- lowed by a spirant], the [final] n [is changed to a visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ]. Note: As Whitney points out, this rule is uniformly applied by the manuscripts of the ŚAV. Whitney’s further contribution lies in pointing out that the doctrine proposed by this rule amounts to an insertion of a sibilant, and the n is subsequently replaced by the nasalization of the preceding vowel. Whitney offers a historical explanation: “It is sufficiently evident that this in- sertion of a sibilant after a final n before a surd mute is no proper phonetical process: the combination of the nasal and following non-nasal is perfectly natu- ral and easy without the aid of a transition sound, nor can any physical expla- nation be given of the thrusting in between them of a sibilant, which only en- cumbers the conjunction. … The historical rather than phonetical origin of the r which is appended (see rule 29 = CA 2.1.29, below) to a few accusatives plu- ral in the Vedic language before a vowel has been long since pointed out by Bopp; and a kindred explanation of the conversion of ān into ān̐ before a vowel (see rule 27 = CA 2.1.27, below) was added by him in his Comparative Grammar. He has refrained from tracing the insertion of a sibilant before c and t to the same cause, doubtless, because of the numerous instances in which the insertion is made after a word which is not entitled by origin to a final s. But

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका291 nothing is more natural than that an insertion originally organic, but of which the true character was forgotten, and which had come to seem merely euphonic, should considerably extend its sphere of occurrence, and should be by degrees, and more and more, applied to cases to which it did not historically belong. Now a very large majority of the words ending in n are accusatives plural and nominatives singular, to both of which cases comparative grammar clearly shows that a final s belongs as case-ending; and I can entertain no doubt that the whole phenomenon of the insertion of the sibilant arose from its preserva- tion in these forms, and from the inorganic extension of the same mode of combination, by analogy, to the much smaller classes of vocative, locative, and verbal forms.” I have quoted Whitney’s explanation in full, because it is an explanation which has been subsequently accepted without any challenge. In his footnote (1862: 86-87), Whitney offers statistical information pertaining to the occurrence of this type of sandhi. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नकारस्य चटतवर्गेषु अघोषेषु अनूष्म- परेषु विसर्जनीयो भवति । ‘भवांश्चिनोति’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘भवांश्छादयति’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘भवांष्टीकते’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘भवांस्तरति’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘भवांस्तत्र’ (not in Vedic texts)। अघोषेष्वित्येव । ‘बृ॒हन् दक्षि॑णया’ (H, N: णायाः)(अ.वे. ६.५३.१)। ‘नैना॒न्नम॑सा प॒रः’ (अ.वे. ७.७.१)। अनूष्मपरेष्वित्येव । ‘भवान्त्सरु’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘महान्त्सरु’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: Most of the examples, not attested in the AV, are found in the KV on P.8.3.7 (नश्छव्यप्रशान्). Again we must note that Surya Kanta does not suggest that these examples are from the so-called now lost genuine Śaunakīya recension. It is absolutely unconscionable that the commentator does not offer a single example from the text of the Atharvan to illustrate this phenomenon, which is by no means rare in the Atharvan text. By citing the examples which he does, he shows how deeply influenced he is by the tradition of Pāṇinian grammar. २.१.२७. आकारोपधस्योपबद्धादीनां स्वरे । Whitney (2.27). E (orig), F (orig): आकारोपबद्धा°. P: °स्यौप°.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 292 Translation: In words like upabaddha [i.e. upabaddhān], [the final n], preceded by ā, [is changed to a visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ], before a vowel. Note: While the previous rule survives in the classical language, the present rule is applicable only to Vedic language. Here, the visarjanīya is eventually replaced with y by CA (2.2.2), and by CA (2.1.21), this y is deleted. The other change taking place is the compensatory nasalization of the preceding vowel by CA (1.3.6). Thus, the sequence upabaddhān+iha is changed in the Saṃhitāpāṭha to upabaddhā̃ iha. In the classical usage, this would remain upa- baddhāniha. It is not immediately obvious why the sandhi of devān+ca result- ing in devāṃśca should retain the historical dimension down to the classical usage, while the combination upabaddhān+iti should lose that historical dimen- sion. As Whitney points out, “All the cases in which this loss of a final n occurs are accusatives plural or nominatives singular, which originally pos- sessed a final s after the n, and the loss of the n before the sibilant, with ac- companying nasalization of the preceding vowel, and then the disappearance of the sibilant itself, as in other cases after ā and before a vowel, are unquestiona- bly the cause of the sandhi as it finally presents itself.” The interesting thing is that there is no synchronic generalization of this rule to all cases with final -ān followed by a vowel, but the phenomenon is limited to a set of defined cases. For example, yātumān+ayam in AV (1.7.4) does not change to yātumā̃ ayam. Whitney himself notes: “The loss of the n with nasalization of the vowel is evidently an old-style sandhi, going out of use, and no longer appearing except sporadically. It is interesting, as regards this sandhi and that taught in the pre- ceding rule - which have both … the same historical origin - to note the rela- tions of the Rik and the Atharvan usage to one another and to the practice of the classical Sanskrit. The insertion of the s, which has become a necessary proceeding under the modern euphonic rules, is almost universal in the Athar- van, and comparatively rare in the Rik: the conversion of the n into anusvāra, of which the general Sanskrit grammar knows nothing, is only infrequently observed in the Atharvan, while it is made in the Rik with but few exceptions.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आकारोपधस्य नकारस्य विसर्जनीयो भवति । उपबद्धादीनां स्वरे । ‘उप॑बद्धाँ इ॒हा व॑ह’ (अ.वे. १.७.७)। ‘शा॒स इ॒त्था म॒हाँ अ॑सि’ (अ.वे. १.२०.४)। ‘यो

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका293 अ॒स्माँ अ॑भि॒दास॑ति’ (अ. वे. १.१९.३)। ‘सर्वा॒न् म॒च्छपथाँ॒ अधि॑’ (अ.वे. २.७.१)। Note: There is a slight error when Whitney says that the commentator cites five instances. The commentary cites only four instances. However, Whitney collects a complete list of such cases in the text of AV. The gaṇa referred to in this CA rule is fully spelled out by the APR (196), and out of a total of 76 instances listed by the APR, the CAB cites the first four in the same order. This, in spite of Surya Kanta’s view to the contrary, indicates a very close connection between the CAB and the APR. One should also note that Whitney’s listing does not completely match the listing of the gaṇa as found in the APR, and the differences between these listings need to be further explored. All the instances listed under APR (196) are covered by Whitney’s listing, but Whitney’s listing contains substantially more instances. Below, I am listing those cases which are listed as showing a case of this rule, which are listed by Whitney, but are not found in the listing under APR (196): 1.19.3; 4.19.5; 4.19.7; 5.23.8; 6.15.1-2; 6.54.3; 6.69.2; 7.57.1; 7.65.1; 9.1.19; 10.3.14; 10.3.15; 11.9.22; 11.9.24; 13.2.5; 13.2.18; 13.2.21; 13.2.29; 14.1.45; 14.1.55; 14.2.10; 18.2.13; 18.2.18. Whitney also lists the following instances from the 19th and the 20th Kāṇḍa of the AV, which are completely left out of consideration by the APR (196): 19.6.8; 19.13.8; 19.26.3; 19.32.7; 19.36.4; 19.50.4; 19.59.2; 20.127.7; 20.128.4; 20.128.5; 20.128.8; 20.136.15. One needs to study all these instances indi- vidually. However, at first glance, it seems plausible that the scope of the ap- plication of this rule went on increasing even after the gaṇa was fully listed by the APR. Such an increasing scope for this application is indeed puzzling, es- pecially since it is not represented in the classical language. One possible rea- son for it may be sought in the generally accepted R̥gvedic influence on the AV tradition. As Whitney points out, this rule is applied in the “Rik with but few exceptions,” the R̥gvedic influence may have led the AV tradition in the direc- tion opposite to that of the classical language. २.१.२८. वृक्षाँ वनानीति वकारे । Whitney (2.28). A, B, D, P: °क्षां°. E, F: °क्षाँऽ°. Hb, Nb: वृक्षान्°. O: °क्षँ वनानाति°.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 294 Translation: In the sequence vr̥kṣān vanāni, [the final n changes to a visarjanīya] before v. Note: The rule specifically mentions the phrase vr̥kṣān vanāni to re- strict this change to this instance. However, as Whitney points out: “The counter-examples [e.g. vr̥kṣān vātaḥ and vr̥kṣān vayāḥ cited by the CAB], however, are fabricated: no such passages occur in the Atharvan. Nor is the citation of vanāni in the rule necessary, although excusable enough: a v follows vr̥kṣān in no other passage of the text, except in xii.1.51, where it is separated from it by an avasāna, and so exercises upon it no euphonic influence.” In the example above, the n is changed to a visarjanīya, which is subsequently de- leted, and the preceding vowel is nasalized. This is also a type of sandhi which is not attested in the classical language. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वृक्षाँ वनानीति वकारे नकारस्य विसर्जनीयो भवति । ‘वृ॒क्षाँ वना॑नि॒ सं च॑र’ (अ.वे. ६.४५. १)। सोपपदस्य ग्रहणमे(H, N: मै)तावत्त्वार्थम् । इह मा भूत्। ‘वृक्षान् वातो वृक्षान् वयाः’ (not in AV)। २.१.२९. नाम्युपधस्य रेफ ऋतूँरुत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम् । Whitney (2.29): °मादीनास्. D, J, K, M, Nb, O, P: Daṇḍa after रेफः. E, F: place ऽ after रेफ. Translation: [The final n], preceded by a nāmin [i.e. any vowel other than a or ā], is changed to r, in the passages r̥tūn ut- sr̥jate vaśī etc. Note: Whitney criticizes the formulation: “The Prātiśākhya is to be reprehended here for not treating the cases to which this rule applies in the same manner as those coming under the preceding rules, by prescribing the conversion of n into visarjanīya, and leaving it for rule 42 (= CA 2.2.2), below, to change the latter into r.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नाम्युपधस्य नकारस्य रेफो भवति । ऋतूंरुत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम् । ‘ऋ॒तूँरुत्सृ॑जते व॒शी’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका295 (अ.वे. ६.३६.२)। ‘मो षु प॒णीँर॒भि’ (अ.वे. ५.११.७)। ‘दस्॑यूँरु॒त बो॑धि’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.६)। Note: The gaṇa referred to in this CA rule has been fully listed by the APR (197), and out of a total of eight instances listed therein, the CAB quotes the first three in the same order. Whitney points out that there are nine cases of this rule in the text of the Atharvan. The APR lists r̥tũr anyaḥ (AV 14.1.23), which is excluded in Whitney’s listing. In this case, the Whitney-Roth text actually agrees with the APR. Whitney additionally lists 6.61.2 and 7.81.1, which are excluded by the APR listing. It is likely that the scope of this sandhi slightly increased after the listing of the APR was made. २.१.३०. न समैरयन्तादीनाम् । Whitney (2.30). A, B, D: °तामित्येवमादीनाम्. Translation: [The change of n taught in the preceding rules to visarjanīya or r] does not take place in cases such as sam airayan tām. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न समैरयन्तादीनां नकारस्य यत्प्राप्तं तद्भवति । ‘समै॑रय॒न्तां व्यू॑र्णुवन्तु’ (अ.वे. १.११.२)। ‘कु॒ल॒पा रा॑ज॒न् ताम् उ॑ ते’ (अ.वे. १.१४.३)। ‘अ॒स्मिन् ति॑ष्ठतु॒ याः’ (अ.वे. १.१५.२)। Note: Whitney, referring to these three examples, says: “The three happen to be typical examples of the three principal classes of cases - verbal forms, vocatives, and locatives - in which we should not expect to see the sibilant inserted, since the forms did not originally end in a sibilant.” Expan- sion of the insertion of a sibilant in these cases can then be dated to a post-AV period. On rule CA (2.1.26 = Whitney 2.26), Whitney offers a ‘complete list of exceptions’ in a footnote. The APR (198) follows a different strategy. In- stead of formulating a gaṇa of exceptions, it lists cases where the final n is pre- ceded by a short vowel and followed by t, where the n changes to a visarjanīya. After providing a listing of such cases, the APR says: इत्यतोऽन्यत्र ह्रस्वोपधस्य तवर्गे प्रकृत्या. This makes it difficult to directly compare Whitney’s data with those offered by the APR.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 296 Regarding the expression समैरयन्तादीनाम्, Whitney (AV Transl, Vol. I., p. 11) points out the ambiguity involved in the form of the citation: “The word (tam or tāṃ) and its predecessor are quoted in the Prāt. (ii.30 = CA 2.1.30), … but the form of the quotation (samairayantādīnām) prevents our seeing whether its authors read tā́m or tám; the comm. gives tām.” २.१.३१. मकारस्य स्पर्शे परसस्थानः । Whitney (2.31). H, J, M, Na, P: °सःस्थानः. A, B: मकारस्पर्शे°. Translation: [A final] m, before a stop, is changed to a con- sonant which has the same point of articulation as the following [stop]. Note: In conjunction with CA (1.4.4: आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः), this rule changes the final m to a nasal consonant of the same point of articulation as the follow- ing stop. The CAB on CA (1.4.4) cites our present rule as an example where the principle of maximal featural proximity enunciated in CA (1.4.4) must ap- ply. Thus, the present rule changes the word-final m to ṅ, ñ, ṇ, n, or m, de- pending upon which stop follows m. We should note that Pāṇini allows the change of m to an anusvāra and its maintenance before any consonant as an option to its change to a nasal homorganic with the following stop. Pāṇini also allows the change of m to nasal ỹ, ṽ, or l̃, before y, v, and l. CA (2.1.35) makes allowance for only l̃. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मकारस्य परसस्थानो(H, N: परःस्था- नो) भवति स्पर्शे परतः । ‘सङ्का॑शयामि वह॒तुम्’ (अ.वे. १४.२.१२)। ‘उ॒दागा॑ञ्जी॒वः’ (अ.वे. १४.२.४४)। ‘तण्डय- मानम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘सन्न॒स्तेभिः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३५. २)। ‘सन्तैः प॒शुभिः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.३६.५)। ‘सन्न॒ष्टेन॑’ (अ.वे. ७.९.४)। ‘सन्त्वयै॑धिषीमहि’ (अ.वे. १४.२.१७)। ‘मा त्वा॑ वृ॒क्षः सम्बा॑धिष्ट॒’ (अ.वे. १८.२.२५)। शान्तस्तान्नान्तः(H, N: न्नोदात्तः)पदे तवर्गे प्रकृत्या । ‘दु॒र्णाम्नीः॒ सर्वाः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१७.५)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका297 Note: Whitney reads the ms. H: शान्तस्तान्नेदान्तःपदे तवर्गे प्रकृत्या. He is unable to read the first half, which he suspects to be an additional citation, and translates the second half as: “in the interior of a word, m remains unchanged before a dental.” The manuscripts do not exactly support Whitney’s reading, though the passage still remains largely corrupt. I suggest the following emen- dation: शान्तस्तान्नान्तःपदे तवर्गे प्रकृत्या. I take the last portion of this passage ex- actly in the same way as done by Whitney, i.e. अन्तःपदे तवर्गे प्रकृत्या. The first two expressions, i.e. śāntaḥ and tānna, may be taken to illustrate the rule 2.1.31. The expression śāntaḥ, AV (3.21.9), illustrates the change of m to n, with the etymology from #śam-ta, and the expression tānna, AV (5.18.7), stands for tām-na. Is the expression sannaṣṭena (AV, 7.9.4) a misinterpretation for saṃ- nas-tena ? On sannastebhiḥ in AV (2.35.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 80) says: “All the saṃhitā-mss. make the absurd combination naṣṭébhiḥ in d, seeming to have in mind the participle naṣṭá; SSP. retains naṣṭébhis in his text, while ours emends to nas tebhiḥ, as given in the comment to Prāt. ii.31 (= CA 2.1.31).” २.१.३२. अन्तस्थोष्मसु लोपः । Whitney (2.32). E, F, Nb: No Visarga after लोप. Translation: Before semi-vowels and spirants, [the word- final m is] deleted. Note: After deleting the m before semi-vowels and spirants, the pre- vious vowel is nasalized by CA (1.3.5: नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः). The CA procedure differs from Pāṇini in that Pāṇini allows the change of m to na- sal ỹ, ṽ, or l̃, before y, v, and l. The CA (2.1.35) makes allowance for only l̃. Before any consonant, Pāṇini also allows the maintenance of an anusvāra. The anusvāra is left out of consideration by the CA in favor of the nasalized vowel. Whitney on this rule surveys the variegated practice of the Prātiśākhyas. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्तस्थोष्मसु परतः मकारस्य लोपो भवति । ‘वृ॒क्षँ यद्गावः॑’ (अ.वे. १.२.३)। ‘पि॒तर॒ँ वरु॑णम्’ (अ.वे. १.३.३)। ‘स॒ँरा॒धय॑न्तः॒ सधु॑राः॒’ (अ.वे. ३.३०.५)। ‘परा॒द्य दे॒वा वृ॑जि॒नँ शृ॑णन्तु’ (अ.वे. ८.३.१४)। ‘न्यो॒ष(H,

अध्याय २, पाद १ 298 N: ए)तँ ह॒तम्’ (अ.वे. ८.४.१)। ‘सँ सुभू॑त्या’ (अ.वे. ३.१४.१)। ‘भवसि सँ समृ॑द्ध्या’ (अ.वे. १२.३.२१)। Note: Whitney is undoubtedly right in saying that this deletion of m carries with it the nasalization of the preceding vowel. However, both the manuscripts simply show the anusvāra where one would expect a nasal vowel. २.१.३३. ऊष्मस्वेवान्तःपदे । Whitney (2.33). A, B, D, O: उ° for ऊ°. Translation: Within the same word, [the m is deleted] only before spirants. Note: After the deletion of m, the preceding vowel is nasalized by CA (1.3.5: नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऊष्मस्वेव अन्तःपदे मकारस्य लोपो भवति । ‘द्वे च॑ मे विँश॒तिश्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.२)। ‘ति॒स्रश्च॑ मे त्रि॒ँशच्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.३)। ‘चत॑स्रश्च मे चत्वारिँ॒शच्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.४)। ‘पुमा॑न् पु॒ँसः’ (अ.वे. ३.६.१)। ‘तत्र॑ पु॒ँसु(H, N: स)व॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ६.११.१)। ऊष्मस्वेवेति किमर्थम् । ‘पति॒र्यः प्र॑तिका॒म्यः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३६.८)। Note: In all the above examples, the manuscripts simply show anu- svāras where the rule stipulates deletion of m and the subsequent nasalization of the preceding vowels. The commentary cites only one counter-example: pratikāmyaḥ (AV 2.36.8). Whitney points out: “Instances of m before r in like position would not be hard to give - e.g. tāmradhūmrāḥ (x.2.11) - but it is found before l only in root syllables, as in malimlucam (viii.6.2), and before v only in the case which forms the subject of rule 37 (= CA 2.1.37), below.” Whitney also appropriately points out that “this rule and the next concern mat- ters with which the Prātiśākhya properly has no concern,” because they deal with internal sandhis which are not altered during the transformations between the Padapāṭha and the Saṃhitāpāṭha.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका299 २.१.३४. नकारस्य च । Whitney (2.34). Translation: Also, n [is deleted before sibilants within a given word]. Note: This rule, like the previous rule, also deals with what may be strictly called an internal sandhi, which one would encounter only in the deri- vation of a given word, rather than in transformations between the Padapāṭha and the Saṃhitāpāṭha. In that sense, as Whitney points out, these rules exceed the strictly defined scope of a Prātiśākhya. Interestingly, these rules provide us some insight into the grammatical derivations of words as understood by the CA. For instance, this rule assumes that a form like parũṣi is derived from parūnṣi, while the previous rule assumes that a form like vĩśati is derived from vimśati. For instance, in the derivation of the form parũṣi, Pāṇini starts with parus+i. Then, P.7.1.72 (नपुंसकस्य झलचः) prescribes the augment nUM, which goes after the u of parus, leading to paruns+i. The CA seems to assume a somewhat similar process. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नकारस्य ऊष्मस्वेव अन्तःपदे लोपो भवति । ‘परूँ

॑षि॒ यस्य॑ सम्भा॒राः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१)। ‘यज्ँाू॑षि॒ होत्रा॑ ब्रूमः॒’ (अ.वे. ११.६.१४)। ‘अ॒त्तो(N: त्रा) ह॒वीँषि॑’ (अ.वे. १८.३.४४)। ऊष्मस्वेवेत्येव । ‘तौदी॒ नामा॑सि क॒न्या॑’ (अ.वे. १०.४.२४)। Note: Again the manuscripts show merely the anusvāra, where one would expect to find a nasalized vowel. २.१.३५. उभयोर्लकारे लकारोऽनुनासिकः । Whitney (2.35). A, B, D, J: °भकारो° for °लकारो°. Translation: Both [i.e. m and n] are changed to a nasal l̃ before an l. Note: Unlike Pāṇini, the CA does not make provision for ỹ and ṽ for m before y and v.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 300 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उभयोः नकारमकारयोः लकारे परतः लकारः अनुनासिको भवति । ‘तल्ँलो॒कम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२८. ५)। ‘अवि॑ल्ँलो॒केन॑’ (अ.वे. ३.२९.३)। ‘प्र॒ति॒(H, N: ती)- माल्ँलो॒काः’ (अ.वे. १८.४.५)। ‘दु॒र्गन्धी॒ल्ँलोहि॑तास्यान्’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१२)। ‘सर्वा॑ल्ँलो॒कान्’ (अ.वे. ४.३८.५)। Note: Referring to the citation from AV (18.4.5), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 873) says: “The reading and sense at the beginning of c are very doubtful; the pada-mss. all give prati-mā́m, as if it were accustive of pratimā́; most of the saṃhitā-mss. have pratīmā́m (our Bs. has pratímā́m !!∀, and P.M. pratimā́m; T. has pratīmám), and it is quoted in the comment to the Prāt. (ii.35 = CA 2.1.35 : so the ms.) as the same !that is, I presume, in the form pratīmām∀. SPP. emends to prátī’mā́m, since, with his usual disregard of the accent, the comm. so reads, explaining imām as referring to pr̥thivīm; our edition has pratimā́m, with the majority of our earlier mss. The translation im- plies práti mā́m, simply on account of superior intelligibility; doubtless the true AV. reading is pratīmā́m.” We should note that the reading found in both the mss. of the CAB actually agrees with Whitney’s final conclusion. २.१.३६. न समो राजतौ । Whitney (2.36). Translation: [The m] of sam is not [deleted] before [the r of the root] rāj. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न सम् इत्यस्य मकारस्य राजतौ परतः यत्प्राप्तं तद्भवति । ‘स॒म्राडेको॒ वि रा॑जति’ (अ.वे. ६. ३६.३)। ‘स॒म्राज्ञ्ये॑धि॒ श्वशु॑रेषु स॒म्राज्ञ्यु॒त दे॒वृषु॑ । नना॑न्दुः(H, N: न्दृषु) स॒म्राज्ञ्ये॑धि स॒म्राज्ञ्यु॒त श्व॒श्र्वाः’ (अ.वे. १४.१.४४)। Note: A possible counter-example to this rule may be the form saṃ- [sã?]rādhayantaḥ in AV (3.30.5). Both the manuscripts of the commentary show the anusvāra in addition to retaining the m. As the rule goes, there is no place for an anusvāra in these examples.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका301 २.१.३७. सन्ध्ये च वकारे । Whitney (2.37). A, B (corr), K, P: संध्ये वकारे. B (orig), D, M: °चकारे. J: °चाकारे. Translation: Also before v resulting from a sandhi, [the m is not deleted]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न सम् इत्यस्य मकारस्य यत्प्राप्तं तद्भ- वति संध्ये वकारे परतः । ‘सम्वा॒स्नाह॑ आ॒स्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६. ५६.३)। Note: Here, the sequence sam v āsnā is derived by the change of u to v before the following ā. The Mss H adds ūṃ iti at the end. २.१.३८. वर्गविपर्यये स्फोटनः पूर्वेण चेद्विरामः । Whitney (2.38). A, B, D, K, P(corr): place Daṇḍa after स्फोटनः, and treat the rest as a separate Sūtra. Ha, Na: °स्फोष्टनः. Translation: [In a stop+stop combination], in the reverse order of the stop-series [i.e. reverse of the normal order: k- series, c-series, ṭ-series, t-series, and the p-series], there is an insertion of a sphoṭana [i.e. a vocalic particle of one-eighth mora length, between the stops], if the first [stop of the combination] occurs at the end [of a pada]. Note: The term sphoṭana has been discussed at length in the Note to CA (1.4.12: तदेव स्फोटनः). Referring to sphoṭana, Allen (1953: 74) says: “This would appear to indicate a type of svarabhakti, whether voiced or voiceless, the infinitesimal duration of which is suggested by the specification of a value 1/8 a, in fact a minimal audible release. The mechanism of the feature referred to is perhaps the release of the front closure during the formation but before the completion of the back closure, resulting in the momentary outflow of an air- stream attenuated by the back constriction.” I agree with Whitney that the term viparyaya refers to not just ‘differ- ence of the series,’ but to their reverse order, i.e. where a stop is followed by another stop belonging to a series pronounced farther back on the oral track.

अध्याय २, पाद १ 302 All the instances offered by the commentary fit this pattern: ṭ+k, t+k, b+k, and d+g. Whitney says: “That the Hindu theory allows sphoṭana in the combina- tion of the phrase only in the case two mutes meet in the inverse order of the vargas to which they belong has something of arbitrariness in it, yet is not without foundation; for it may be noted, I think, that it is perceptibly harder to change from a contact farther forward in the mouth to one farther back, than to make a like transfer in the contrary direction, without allowing any intervening escape of breath or sound: and the order of the vargas follows the advance in the mouth of the place of formation.” Allen’s explanation given above is not very different from Whitney’s. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वर्गाणां विपर्यये स्फोटनः संध्यो भवति पूर्वेण चेद्विरामो भवति । ‘वषट्कारेण’ (अ.वे. ५.२६. १२)। ‘अव॒त्कम्’ (अ.वे. २.३.१)। ‘ए॒ज॒त्काः’ (अ.वे. ५. २३.७)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुब्गा॑य॒त्री’ (अ.वे. १८.२.६)। ‘यद्गा॑य॒त्रे’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.१)। पूर्वेणेति किमर्थम् । ‘क्रमा॒न् को अ॑स्याः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१०)। विराम इति किमर्थम् । ‘वे॒णो- रद्गा॑ इव’ (अ.वे. १.२७.३)। ‘वर्गाणां विपरीतानां सन्निपाते निबोधत । व्यवायी स्फोटनाख्यस्तु यद्गा॑य॒त्रे निदर्शनम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Referring to the citation of AV (1.27.3), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 28) says that Sāyaṇa’s reading is udgās for adgās as given by the CAB, and that neither word is quotable from elsewhere. For Whitney’s comment on avatkám, see the Note on CA (1.4.12). Whitney criticizes the interpretation of the term pūrveṇa assumed by the CAB. For the commentary, the term pūrva ‘previous,’ seems to mean non- final, i.e. non-nasal. The term pūrva simply refers to the earlier member in a consonant-cluster. The commentary seems to exclude the combinations of nasals with non-nasals from the occurrence of sphoṭana. Whitney suggests that these must be included, and offers the following examples: keśān+ khādantaḥ (AV 5.19.3), vidvān+gandharvaḥ (AV 2.1.2), and devān+ghr̥tavatā (AV 3.10.11). Whitney supports his interpretation by pointing out that “the Vāj. Pr. makes no such exception of the nasals.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका303 २.१.३९. न टवर्गस्य चवर्गे कालविप्रकर्षस्त्वत्र भवति तमाहुः कर्षण इति । Whitney (2.39). A, B, D, M: न टवर्ग्रस्य चवर्ग्रे … भवति । तमाहुः कर्षण इति॥. P also divides the rule in the same way. Ha, Na: °र्षस्तत्र. I: 39. Translation: There is [no insertion of a sphoṭana] when a stop of the ṭ-series is followed by a stop of the c-series. How- ever, here there is a prolongation of time [needed to pronounce the cluster], and that [prolongation] is called karṣaṇa [i.e. ‘drag- ging’]. Note: The term karṣaṇa is not met with in the phonetic literature elsewhere. Whitney remarks: “It is easy to see the physical ground of this ex- ception to the rule prescribing sphoṭana. The same close relationship with re- spect to place of utterance which causes the final palatal to pass often into a lin- gual instead of reverting to the guttural out of which it originally grew, causes the lingual, in coming before the palatal, to virtually double it only. The trans- fer of position of the organs is too slight and easy to necessitate the emission of an intervening sound.” Also see Allen (1953: 74-75). Perhaps, the CA needs an interpretation different from the one offered by Whitney. The extension of duration (kālaviprakarṣa) in this case is explainable by referring to the fact that the retroflex stops require the curling of one’s tongue and touching the top of the oral cavity with the underside of the tip of the tongue. On the other hand, the pronunciation of the palatal stops requires touching the tālu by the middle of the tongue. Making a switch from the one to the other obviously involves a major rearrangement of the articulatory organs. The reason that there is no sphoṭana is that there is no discontinuity of the contact of the tongue-tip moving from the retroflex to palatal position, and hence no intermediate release of breath. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न टवर्गस्य चवर्गे स्फोटनः संध्यो भवति । कालविप्रकर्षस्त्वत्र भवति तमाहुः कर्षण इति । ‘षट् चे॒माः’ (अ.वे. ४.२०.२)। ‘षट् च॑ मे ष॒ष्टिश्च॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१५.६)। ‘षड् जा॒ता’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१६)।

अध्याय २, पाद १ 304 इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । C, E, F, H, N: द्वितीयस्य प्रथमः पादः. A, B, D, M, P: प्रथमः पादः. I, J: इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः. O: च. द्वितीयस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ ३९ ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्वितीयस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ ____________________________________

॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ द्वितीयः पादः ॥ २.२.१. विसर्जनीयस्य परसस्थानोऽघोषे । Whitney (2.40). A, B, D, Ha, J, M, Na, P: °सःस्थानो°. O: °नोपोषे. Translation: The visarjanīya [= ḥ], before a voiceless [con- sonant], is changed to a [maximally similar consonant] which has the same point of articulation as the following [voiceless consonant]. Note: This rule clearly works in conjunction with CA (1.4.4: आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः) in ensuring that of all possible sounds which share the same point of arti- culation as the following voiceless consonant, only the consonant which is maximally similar with a visarjanīya will be substituted. The CAB on CA (1.4.4) cites the present rule as an illustration for the use of the general princi- ple of finding a substitute which is maximally similar to the original. For in- stance, in a case like yaḥ+ca, the possible substitutes include all the sounds which share the same point of articulation as c, i.e. i-vowels, e, c-series, and ś. Of all these possible substitutes, CA (1.4.4) will permit only ś to replace ḥ in the above example, because ś is maximally similar to ḥ, i.e. it is voiceless and a spirant. Thus, the above rule predicts that the ḥ becomes a jihvāmūlīya, i.e. ḫ, before k, and kh; it becomes ś before c, ch, and ś; it becomes ṣ before ṭ, ṭh, and ṣ; it becomes s before t, th, and s; and it becomes upadhmānīya, i.e. ẖ, before p, and ph. Whitney notes that “The theory of the Prātiśākhya, however, is not at all the practice of the manuscripts, and the latter, rather than the former, has been followed by us in the printed text.” Other editions of the AV also follow the same practice. Whitney points out that none of the AV manuscripts distin- guish the jihvāmūlīya and the upadhmānīya from the visarjanīya, and approv- ingly he says: “as we cannot but think, with much reason: since the division of this indistinct and indefinite sound into three different kinds of indefiniteness savors strongly of an over-refinement of analysis.” On the one hand, Whitney’s discussion is suggestive of the distinction of phonemic versus allo- phonic sounds as it developed later in linguistics. On the other hand, it is also indicative of the emphasis he put on the written versus oral comprehension of

अध्याय २, पाद २ 306 the text of the AV, and the fact that the texts like CA were not aimed at de- scribing the practice of writing, but at the accurate pronunciation of the Vedic texts. The best Vedic recitation even today distinguishes between these three sounds, though they are not represented in the manuscripts. For a critique of Whitney’s views, see: Allen (1953: 50). While Whitney concentrated primarily on the written evidence, Allen (1953: 51) offers a historical understanding which bridges the early descrip- tions of pronunciation and the later practice of writing: “In later, though still ancient, times there appears to have been a tendency for -ḥ to extend its usage to contexts other than in pausa. The earliest of these extensions was to the po- sition before the initial fricatives ś-, ṣ-, s-, where it replaced the homorganic final -ś, -ṣ, -s (indraś śūraḥ > indraḥ śūraḥ, etc.). This practice was then ex- tended to the position before the velar and labial voiceless stops: in connexion with this innovation we find mentioned the names of Āgniveśya, Vālmīki, Śākalya, and the Mādhyandina school, whilst the ancient grammarian Śākaṭā- yana is quoted as holding to the more conservative practice. These changes have been generally accepted so far as the writing of Sanskrit is concerned, and A.H. Fry in his article ‘A Phonemic Interpretation of Visarga’ has suggested that the spread of -ḥ was due to the writers of Classical Sanskrit ‘operating with a phonemic orthography’. Though the term ‘orthography’ once again begs the vexed question of writing, it is possible that this extension had a phonological rather than a phonetic basis.” A history of the actual recitational practice is difficult to reconstruct, though occasionally one does come across reciters who exhibit clear differences between the pronunciation of these sounds. Therefore, conclusions based solely on manuscript material are not an appropriate reflection of the recitational practice. Whitney provides a detailed survey of the views of different Prātiśākhyas in his comments. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विसर्जनीयस्य परसस्थानो भवति अघोषे । कवर्गे । ‘अ॒न्तः॒को॒षमि॑व’ (अ.वे. १.१४.४)। चवर्गे । ‘यश्च॑ द्वि॒षन्’ (अ.वे. १.१९.४)। टवर्गे । ‘वृक्ष- ष्टीकते’ (not in Vedic texts)। तवर्गे । ‘मय॑स्तो॒केभ्यः॑’ (अ.वे. १.१३.२)। ‘अवि॑स्तो॒कानि॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१९.२)। ‘बल्हि॑कान् वा परस्त॒राम्’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.७)। ‘युज॑स्तु॒जे जनाः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.३३.१)। ‘यथा॒ पस॑स्तायाद॒रम्’ (अ.वे. ६.७२.२)। ‘प्राव॑न्तु नस्तु॒जये॑’ (अ.वे. ७.४९.१)। ‘त्र॒य॒-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका307 स्त्रिं॒शेन॒ जग॑ती’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। ‘म॒खस्त॑वि॒ष्यते॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.२३)। पवर्गे । ‘ततः॒ परि॒ प्रजा॑तेन’ (अ.वे. ६.८९.- १)। सकारे । ‘वात॑भ्रजास्स्त॒नय॑न्’ (अ.वे. १.१२.१)। ‘अ॒रु॒स्स्राण॑(H: णा, N: णो)म्’ (अ.वे. २.३.३)। ‘विव्र॑ता॒- स्स्थ(H, N: स्थ)न॑’ (अ.वे. ३.८.५)। ‘अति॑ दु॒र्गास्स्रो॒(H, N: स्रो)त्याः’ (अ.वे. १०.१.१६)। Note: Whitney rightly says: “before k and kh it (= visarjanīya) be- comes jihvāmūlīya, and, before p and ph, upadhmānīya – these last two spi- rants being, as already noticed, clearly implied in this rule, although nowhere referred to by name as belonging to the scheme of spoken sounds recognized by the treatise.” The mss. do not orthographically distinguish these two sounds from the visarjanīya. Referring to this rule, Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) says: “The prescription is unmistakable, and must have been carried out by the Śaunakīyas. This is not followed by the Vulgate mss., which, instead, drop the visarjanīya altogether before a sibilant followed by a surd or sonant mute, a usage sanctioned by the APr. 80. Compare Vyāsaśikṣā 156 for this against TPr. 9.1., which is ignored by the TS. mss.; thus indicating a hopeless mixture of śākhā variations.” Here Surya Kanta is again looking for homogeneous and authentic śākhā manuscripts. However, the kind of change which is advocated by the CA perhaps became so outdated by the time the AV was committed to writing, that even the Śaunakīyas may have disregarded the explicit prescription of their own tradition under the pressure of the more cur- rent practice of writing Sanskrit. For such a possible historical development, see: Allen (1953: 51). This possibility cannot be easily discounted. By Surya Kanta’s own admission, the APR represents a somewhat later formulation as compared to CA, and it may have impacted the writing of the AV even in the Śaunakīya tradition. The example वृक्षष्टीकते, which is not attested in a Vedic text, is found in the KV on P.8.2.41 (ष्टुना ष्टुः). It is interesting to note that Surya Kanta does not suggest that this instance belonged to the so-called genuine Śaunakīya re- cension of the AV which is now supposedly lost. For a discussion of related textual problems, see Lanman (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 976): “The rationale of the corruption is not hard to see: the hiatus between c and d being once covered by the fusion of the final of jambhaya with the ā́ of ā́ stenam, nothing was easier than to see a form jambhayās in the first part of the combination, and then to substitute téna for the vastly less

अध्याय २, पाद २ 308 common stenám or for the meaningless tenám (which might be read out of the combination: see Prāt. ii. 40, note); the exigency of the meter occasioned by the blunder with jambhayās then made the insertion of tám easy. With the Berlin solution of the corruption, the meter is in perfect order.” For AV (19.47.8), Whitney-Roth read जम्भया स्तेनं (from assumed jambhaya ā stenam), while the VVRI edition reads जम्भयास्तेन तं, with the Padapāṭha: जम्भयाः । तेन । तम्. २.२.२. स्वरे यकारः । Whitney (2.41). C: °शकारः. Translation: Before a vowel, [a visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ] is changed to y. Note: Whitney says: “It is very hard to say whether the conversion into y is a matter of grammatical theory only, or whether it gives account of an actual process of phonetic transition.” For a fuller discussion of this issue, see the Note on CA (2.1.21). For a survey of other Prātiśākhyas, see Whitney on this rule. The examples as cited in the commentary do not show this change to y, but jump to the next stage and delete it, cf. CA (2.1.21). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरे परतः विसर्जनीयस्य यकारो भवति । ‘यस्या॑ उ॒पस्थ॑ उ॒र्व[]न्तरि॑क्षम्’ (अ.वे. ७.६.४)। ‘म॒ध्यन्दि॑न॒ उद्गा॑यति’ (अ.वे. ९.६.४६)। ‘अ॒भि॒पश्य॑त ए॒व’ (अ.वे. १०.८.२४)। ‘सर्व॑ आपः’ (अ.वे. १६.४.६)। Note: The H reading is sa āpaḥ and the N reading is sarva āpaḥ. Re- ferring to the former, which was the only reading accessible to Whitney, he says: “perhaps the reading is corrupt, and va āpaḥ (iii.13.7) or na āpaḥ (xii.1.30) is the passage intended.” Now the manuscript N has provided the proper reading sarva āpaḥ which is attested in AV (16.4.6). २.२.३. नाम्युपधस्य रेफः । Whitney (2.42).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका309 Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ], preceded by a nāmin [i.e. a vowel other than a and ā], is changed to r, [before a vowel]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नाम्युपधस्य विसर्जनीयस्य स्वरे परतः रेफो भवति । ‘अ॒ग्निरासी॑नः’ (अ.वे. ९.७.१९)। ‘वा॒युर॒मि- त्रा॑णाम्’ (अ.वे. ११.१०.१६)। ‘°स्या॒हं म॒न्योरव॒ ज्यामि॑व॒’ (अ.वे. ५.१३.६)। ‘तैर॒मित्राः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.२१.८)। २.२.४. घोषवति च । Whitney (2.43). A, B, D: °ती°. Translation: Also, before a voiced [consonant, the visarja- nīya, preceded by a vowel other than a and ā, is changed to r]. Note: This rule, in conjunction with the preceding rule, raises some questions about the meaning of the term ghoṣavat, and why the vowels are not covered by this term. These same questions are also raised by the usage of this term in other rules. For a discussion, see the Note on CA (1.1.5), and Introduction, section 5.11. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - घोषवति परतः नाम्युपधस्य विसर्जनी- यस्य स्वरे परतः रेफो भवति । ‘तस्या॑ अ॒ग्निर्व॒त्सः’ (अ.वे. ४.३९.२)। ‘तस्या॑ वा॒युर्व॒त्सः’ (अ.वे. ४.३९.४)। ‘अ॒ग्ने- र्भा॒गः स्थ॑’ (अ.वे. १०.५.७)। ‘अ॒रा॒ती॒योर्भ्रातृ॑व्यस्य’ (अ.वे. १०.६.१)। ‘तैर्म॒ेदिनो॒ अङ्गि॑रसः’ (अ.वे. १०.६.२०)। Note: On the preceding rule, and its commentary, Whitney says: “There is here another lacuna in the manuscript: immediately upon the citation tair amitrāḥ follow tasyā agnir vatsaḥ and the other illustrations of the conver- sion of visarjanīya preceded by an alterant vowel into r before a sonant conso- nant, and then follow the words ghoṣavati ca, before the rule āvaḥ etc. It is evident that the copyist has leaped over the rule ghoṣavati ca, together with its own paraphrase, the final repetition of the preceding rule, and perhaps some of the illustrative citations belonging to one or both of them. There is no reason

अध्याय २, पाद २ 310 whatever to suppose that anything more than this is omitted, or that any rule is lost altogether.” Fortunately, this lacuna is fully made up by the second manu- script, N, now available to me. २.२.५. आवः करकश्च वि वरबिभरसर्वनाम्नः । Whitney (2.44). A, D, Hab, O, P: °विभर°. A, B, D: °म्नाः. Nb, Hb: आवष्क°. P adds a daṇḍa at the end of this rule as a correction. Translation: [Also, the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] āvaḥ, kaḥ, akaḥ, ca vi vaḥ, and abibhaḥ [is changed to r, before a vowel or a voiced consonant], when [these] are not pronominal [expres- sions]. Note: As Whitney points out, “In this and the following rules, as far as the 49th (= CA 2.2.10) inclusive, are treated the words whose final visar- janīya represents an original r, and not s, and in which, accordingly, the r is liable to reappear before a sonant initial, even though a or ā precede.” One should note that the CA itself does not have a notion of an ‘original r.’ The starting point of the rule for the CA is not some abstract derivational or lexical sequence, but the expression as found in the Padapāṭha, i.e. a word as it would appear before pause. The recitational tradition converted the so-called ‘origi- nal’ r to a visarjanīya before pause, and then this visarjanīya became the start- ing point for our rule. For instance, the CA does not have a rule parallel to P.8.3.15 (खरवसानयोर्विसर्जनीयः) which says: “Before a voiceless consonant (= khaR) or a pause (avasāna), an r is replaced with a visarjanīya.” The CA rule takes off from where P.8.3.15 leaves a derivation. Whitney also points out that there is some built-in ‘superfluity.’ The commentary says that some instances are cited along with a few associated words to avoid generalization and to limit the listing to these specific cases. Whitney says that the final condition added to the rule, i.e. exclusion of pro- nominal usages achieves the same purpose, and, therefore, there is ‘super- fluity.’ In all the examples cited by the commentary, except AV (6.81.3), the visarjanīya is not followed by either a vowel or a voiced consonant in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. Thus, where would one see the change of visarjanīya to r? The commentary offers examples of repetition (parihāra) of the word concerned with an interposed iti. This creates an occasion for the change of visarjanīya to r before iti. Concerning this cited repetition, Whitney makes a very significant

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका311 observation: “It will be observed that the commentator repeats each word to which the rule applies with iti interposed, except in the last case, where the r appears in saṃhitā. This is in accordance with the usage of the pada-text of the Rigveda, but not with that of the Atharvan, which in no single instance per- forms parihāra of a word ending in a riphita visarjanīya; and we must accord- ingly regard the repetitions as taken from the krama-text, which would give such a form to the words in question, as standing at the end of a line.” He also points to the deviant behavior of the 20th Kāṇḍa: “Excepting in the twentieth book, whose pada-text is shown by this and other peculiarities to be merely a putting together of extracts from that of the Rik.” The fact that the CA does not note the deviant behavior of the 20th Kāṇḍa probably indicates that the 20th Kāṇḍa was added to the AV after the formation of the CA. The examples cited by the commentary are mostly found among the examples on APR (141). The CA rule lists instances which show this phenomenon neither in the Saṃhitāpāṭha, nor in the Padapāṭha, but only in the Kramapāṭha. [However, we have prātar iti in the Padapāṭha for RV 4.35.7a]. This is nowhere clearly stated in the rule or in the commentary, but is an inference of Whitney. Un- fortunately, I have not been able to confirm this practice with modern-day re- citers of the AV, none of whom could recite the Krama. I have now found a few manuscripts of the Kramapāṭha and Jaṭāpāṭha for the ŚAV, but unfortunately not for the sections containing these instances. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आवः । कः । अकः । च वि वः । हस्तमबिभः । इति असर्वनाम्नो विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । आवः । ‘सु॒रुचो॑ वे॒न अा॑वः’ । (क्रम !) ‘आवरित्यावः’ (अ.वे. ४.१.१)। आवः कः । ‘सर॑स्वति॒(H, N: ती) तमि॒ह धात॑वे कः’ । (क्रम !) ‘करिति कः’ (अ.वे. ७.१०.१)। करकः । ‘अशं॒ निर्ऋ॑त्या अकः’ । (क्रम !) ‘अकरि- त्यकः’ (अ.वे. २.२५.१)। अकश्च वि वः । ‘स॒तश्च॒ योनि॒- मस॑तश्च॒ वि वः॑’ । (क्रम !) ‘वरिति वः’ (अ.वे. ४.१. १)। सोपपदग्रहणमेतावत्त्वार्थम् । च वि वरबिभः । ‘यं प॑रिह॒स्तमबि॑भ॒रदि॑तिः पुत्रका॒म्या’ (अ.वे. ६.८१.३)। अस- र्वनाम्न इति किमर्थम् । ‘हिर॑ण्यवर्णा॒ अतृ॑पं य॒दा वः॑’ । (क्रम

अध्याय २, पाद २ 312 !) ‘व इति वः’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.६)। ‘यत्रे॒दं वे॒शया॑मि वः’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.७)। २.२.६. द्वार्वारिति । Whitney (2.45). Translation: [Also, the visarjanīya of the forms] dvāḥ and vāḥ [is changed to r, before a vowel or a voiced consonant]. Note: Since these expressions are not followed by a vowel or a voiced consonant either in the Saṃhitāpāṭha or the Padapāṭha, Whitney makes a reasonable assumption that the citations द्वारिति द्वाः and वारिति वाः refer to the practice of the Kramapāṭha. This is comparable with the situation of the ex- amples of the previous rule. Thus, as with the previous rule, we must assume that the listing here was meant to cover the practice of the Kramapāṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्वार्वारिति विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । ‘प्र॒थ॒मा द्वाः’ । (क्रम !) ‘द्वारिति द्वाः’ (अ.वे. ९.३. २२)। ‘तस्मा॒द्वार्नाम॑’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.३)। ‘दि॒व्यं घृ॒तं वाः’। (क्रम !) ‘वारिति वाः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३२)। २.२.७. अजहातेरहाः । Whitney (2.46). D, Ha, K, M (corr), P: °ह्यतेरहाः. J, M (orig): °ह्येते- रहाः. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of the form] ahāḥ [is also changed to r before a vowel or a voiced consonant], except if it is from the root ∀hā. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अहारिति विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । ‘इन्द्र॒स्तान्पर्य॑हा॒र्दाम्ना॑’ (अ.वे. ६.१०३.२, ३)। ‘इ॒ह रा॒ष्ट्र- माहाः॑’ (अ.वे. १३.१.४)।[should add: (क्रम !) ‘अहारित्यहाः’ ।] ‘अ॒ग्निष्टदाहाः॑’ (‘अ॒ग्निष्टदाहा॒र्निर्ऋ॑तेः,’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका313 अ.वे. ७.५३.३)। ‘अहारित्यहाः’ [? no place for parihāra for ahāḥ in AV 7.53.3)। अजहातेरिति किमर्थम् । ‘अहा॒ अरा॑तिम्’ (अ.वे. २.१०.७)। Note: Whitney suggests an alternative formulation for this rule: “An equivalent and, one would think, preferable form for this rule would have been harater ahāḥ, ‘ahāḥ when coming from the root har (hr̥).” Whitney’s sugges- tion has the merit of brevity. The commentary of [pseudo-]Sāyaṇa, on AV (6. 103.2-3, and 7.53.3) paraphrases the form āhāḥ with root hr̥, and AV (13.1.5) refers back to the form āhāḥ in (13.1.4) with ā ahārṣīt. Thus, all the three ex- amples are from the root hr̥ (harati). With the examples cited for this rule, it is clear that the rule applies to a few cases in the Saṃhitāpāṭha such as AV (6.103.2, 3) and (7.53.3); and that there is a counter-example from the Saṃhitāpāṭha, i.e. AV (2.10.7). The in- stance in AV (13.1.4) must be assumed as a case of Kramapāṭha. Referring to the passage ‘इ॒ह रा॒ष्ट्रमाहाः॑’ (अ.वे. १३.१.४)। ‘अ॒ग्निष्टदाहाः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.५३.३)। (क्रम !) ‘अहारित्यहाः’ in the CAB, Whitney makes an impor- tant observation: “iha rāṣṭram ā ’hāḥ (xiii.1.4: the commentator, or the copyist, omits to add ahār ity ahāḥ), and agniṣ ṭad ā ’hāḥ (vii.53.3: here is added ahār ity ahāḥ, but it is out of place, the word not standing in pausa; perhaps the parihāra has slipped away from its proper place after the preceding citation to this: but then the word following ahāḥ should also have been quoted in the last passage, and it should read agniṣ ṭad ā ’hār nirr̥teḥ).” The kind of ill-arrange- ment of the text of the commentary referred to by Whitney must have taken place at a relatively early period, since it is shared by both the available manu- scripts, H and N. Referring to AV (2.10.7), Whitney says: “The comment to Prāt. ii.46 (= CA 2.2.7) quotes ahās in this verse as not ahār, i.e. as from hā, not hr̥” (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 52). The commentary of [pseudo-]Sāyaṇa also paraphrases ahāḥ in this passage with ahāsīḥ atyākṣīḥ. २.२.८. एकामन्त्रिते रौद्विवचनान्तस्य । Whitney (2.47), C, Hbc, N: °रौ°. Other mss. read °रो°. A, B, D: °तै°. A, B: °द्विवचनस्य.

अध्याय २, पाद २ 314 Translation: [Also, the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ], belonging to a vocative singular of [a noun] which has a dual form ending in - rau, [is changed to r, before a vowel or a voiced consonant]. Note: Concerning the formulation of this rule, Whitney makes an important observation: “Here, as in more than one other instance, our treatise shows a greater readiness than the others to avail itself of the help of grammati- cal categories in constructing its rules: all the other Prātiśākhyas laboriously rehearse in detail, one by one, the words which are here disposed of as a class, in one brief rule.” The procedure is also to be contrasted with Pāṇini. For Pāṇini, it is not the case that one takes the forms of words as they would ap- pear before pause, and then combine them by removing the pause. Certain forms may lexically or derivationally end in r. Such r-final forms may then be followed either by pause or by other words beginning with vowels or conso- nants. P.8.3.15 (खरवसानयोर्विसर्जनीयः) says that a final r is changed to a visar- janīya before voiceless consonants, or before pause. Thus, by exclusion, it is left unchanged before vowels and voiced consonants. Thus, Pāṇini neither needs, nor has, a rule which changes the word-final (pre-pausal) visarjanīya to r in some cases, after removal of that pause. The construction of the Saṃhitā- pāṭha from the Padapāṭha essentially amounts to the removal of pause between the separated items. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रौद्विवचनान्तं यस्यामन्त्रितस्य तस्य रौद्विवचनान्तस्य यदेकवचनं तस्मिन् एकामन्त्रिते रौद्विवच- नान्तस्य विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । ‘धातर्देहि’ (not in AV)। ‘सवितर्देहि’ (not in AV)। ‘पुन॑र्देहि’ (अ.वे. १८.३. ७०)। ‘भूमे॑ मात॒र्नि धे॑हि’ (अ.वे. १२.१.६३)। ‘त्वच॑मे॒तां वि॑शस्तः’ । (क्रम !) ‘विशस्तरिति विशस्तः’ (अ.वे. ९. ५.४)। एकामन्त्रितमिति किमर्थम् । ‘दैवा॒(H, N: व्या) होता॑र ऊ॒र्ध्वम्’ (अ.वे. ५.२७.९)। रौद्विवचनान्तस्येति किमर्थम् । ‘त॒वि॒षस्य॑ प्रचेतः’ । (क्रम !) ‘प्रचेत इति प्रचेतः’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.५)। प्रचेतसौ द्विवचनान्तम् । Note: The example(s) धातर्देहि and सवितर्देहि are not found in the Vul- gate of the ŚAV. Whitney rightly points out that पुनर्देहि belongs properly under

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका315 the next rule. Whitney first makes a suggestion: “but possibly the three phrases form a single passage together, and are a genuine citation from some other text.” Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40), carrying Whitney’s sug- gestion forward, construes these three to be part of a single passage suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. In any case, there is no trace of these in any known Vedic text. One finds several instances of धाता दधातु in AV, e.g. AV (7.17.1-3), and it is possible that the commentator created the example धातर्देहि from such associations. An actual instance धा॒त॒रीशा॑नः is found in AV (7.18.1). २.२.९. अन्तःपुनःप्रातःसनुतःस्वरव्ययानाम् । Whitney (2.48). O: अंतः । पुनः । प्रातः । सनुतः । स्वरव्ययानां ॥ Translation: [Also, the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ] of the indecli- nables antaḥ, punaḥ, prātaḥ, sanutaḥ, and svaḥ [is changed to r, before vowels and voiced consonants]. Note: Whitney observes: “The other treatises exclude the noun ánta by defining the accent of antáḥ, and the Rik Pr. treats sváḥ in the same way – a method which renders necessary considerable additional limitation and expla- nation.” For the Pāṇinian procedure, see the Note on CA (2.2.8). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्तःपुनःप्रातःसनुतःस्वरित्येतेषाम् अव्ययानां विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । अन्तः । ‘अ॒न्त॒र्दा॒वे जु॑हुत’ (अ.वे. ६.३२.१)। अन्तः । पुनः । ‘पुन॒र्मैत्वि॑न्द्रि॒यम्’ (अ.वे. ७.६७.१)। पुनः । प्रातः । ‘प्रा॒तर्भगं॑ पषण॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.१६.१)। प्रातः । सनुतः । ‘स॒नु॒तर्यु॑योतु’ (अ.वे. ७.९२.१)। सनुतः । स्वः । ‘स्व[]र्णोऽप॑ त्वा’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। अव्ययानामिति किमर्थम् । ‘यो नः॒ स्वो यो अर॑णः सजा॒तः’ (अ.वे. १.१९.३)। ‘सम॑ग्रः॒ सम॑न्तः । समग्र इति सम्ऽअग्रः। सम॑न्तो भूयासम् । समन्त इति सम्ऽअन्तः’ (क्रम, संहिता ! ‘सम॑ग्रः॒ सम॑न्तो भूयासम्,’ अ.वे. ७.८१.४)।

अध्याय २, पाद २ 316 Note: Whitney’s text for AV (2.5.2) does not show the change of n to ṇ. However, he says (AV Transl. Vol.I., 44): “In the third interpolation, SV. combines svàr ná and AŚS. ŚŚS. svàr ṇá; and the mss. vary between the two; our edition reads the former with the majority of our mss.; SSP. has the latter, with the majority of his.” २.२.१०. स्वर्षाश्च । Whitney (2.49). Ha, Na: स्वर्षा च. I: 10. P(orig): धर्षाश्च. P(corr): स्वर्षाश्च. Translation: Also, [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of the word svaḥ, in the combination] svarṣāḥ (< svaḥ+sāḥ). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वर्षा इति विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति। ‘शषम॑ग्रि॒यः स्व॒र्षाः’ (अ.वे. ५.२.८)। पदग्रहणमघोषार्थम् । संहितायामित्येव । (क्रम !) ‘स्वः॒सा इति॑ स्वः॒ऽसाः’ । Note: The commentary points out that the full expression svarṣāḥ is mentioned to indicate that the change of ḥ of svaḥ to r takes place here in spite of the fact that the following consonant is a voiceless spirant. The previous rules make this change only before vowels and voiced consonants. Then, the commentary says that this change takes place only in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. Whitney notes that this implies that the above change does not take place in the Padapāṭha. Since the Padapāṭha actually separates the components svaḥ and sāḥ from each other, the item svaḥ is in fact followed by a pause, rather than by sāḥ. Therefore, Whitney comments: “This last is rather a gratuitous piece of information.” Actually, the commentary is quoting not the Padapāṭha, but the parihāra or repetition of a final word interposed with iti as it appears in the Kramapāṭha. In the Kramapāṭha, the second time the word appears, its compo- nents are separated from each other, but not when it appears the first time. However, even in the first occurrence, changes like s>ṣ are restored, cf. CA (4.3.6: क्रमे परेण विगृह्यात्) and the commentary CAB on this rule. Thus, in the parihāra for svarṣāḥ, we do not get svarṣāḥ in either repetition. The first time the word is given, svaḥ is not separated from sāḥ, and yet ḥ is not changed to r, nor is s changed to ṣ. Thus, the comment of the CAB seems to have a proper place, and need not be discarded following Whitney. This instance of Krama is now attested from AV 20.11.4 in the BORI ms. 133/1879-80, folio 6.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका317 Another point one should note is that the term saṃhitā in the commen- tary is used in the sense of Saṃhitāpāṭha, rather than its normal later meaning of sandhi or absence of separation. In the parihāra, the word is first given as svaḥsāḥ. Here, by classical standards, we have an occasion for sandhi, since there is no separation of components. However, this is not the same thing as the Saṃhitāpāṭha. २.२.११. अहर्नपुंसकम् । Whitney (2.50). Ha, Na: no Repha. Translation: [Also, the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] the word ahaḥ, if neuter, [is changed to r, before vowels and voiced consonants]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अहरिति विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति नपुंसकं चेद्भवति । ‘यदह॑रहरभि॒गच्छा॑मि’ (अ.वे. १६.७. ११)। ‘अह॒र्मात्य॑पीपरः’ (अ.वे. १७.१.२५)। नपुंसकमिति किमर्थम् । ‘सप्ता(H: प, Whitney: म)हो वर्तते’ । ‘द्वादशा- होऽपि’ (‘द्वा॒द॒शा॒हेन॑’ अ.वे. ९.६.४३)। Note: The example समहो वर्तते (as read by Whitney) cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. The mss. H reads सपहो, which Whitney reported as समहो without even noting the actual mss. reading. Now the mss. N provides a much more acceptable reading सप्ताहो. Surya Kanta did not consult the original mss. readings while making his claims. Whitney may have been misled by the word स॒म॒ह॒ which occurs in AV (5.4.10, and 5.24.1). However, this is not a masculine word and has nothing to do with ahar. २.२.१२. न विभक्तिरूपरात्रिरथन्तरेषु । Whitney (2.51). Translation: However, [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of ahaḥ] does not [change to r], before a case-ending, or before the words rūpa, rātri, and rathantara.

अध्याय २, पाद २ 318 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न तु खलु विभक्तिरूपरात्रिरथन्तर इत्येतेषु परतः अहरिति विसर्जनीयस्य रेफो भवति । विभक्ति । ‘अहोभ्याम्’ । ‘अहो॑भिः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.५५)। विभक्ति । रूप । ‘यदहोरूपाणि दृश्यन्ते’ (not in AV, ‘अहोरूपाणाम्,’ जै.ब्रा. २.२१०; २१३)। रूप । रात्रि । ‘अ॒हो॒रा॒त्राभ्यां॒ नक्ष॑त्रेभ्यः’ (अ.वे. ६.१२८.३)। ‘अ॒हो॒रा॒त्रे इ॒दं ब्रू॑मः’ (अ.वे. ११.६.५)। रात्रि । रथन्तर । ‘यदाहोरथ- न्तरं साम गीयते’ (not in knownVedic texts)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39-40) says that the com- bination of áhas with rūpá and rathaṃtará does not occur in the Vulgate of the AV, and suggests that a genuinely Śaunakīya version of the AV probably contained such examples. I believe, Whitney was correct in his suggestion: “It is a very suspicious circumstance that a vārttika to a rule of Pāṇini’s (viii.2.68, ahno ruvidhau rūparātrirathantareṣūpasaṃkhyānaṃ kartavyam) mentions the same three exceptions which our rule gives: and it is very probable that our treatise in this case, as in several others, has constructed its rule so as to include all the cases noted as occurring in general usage; and hence, that the two phrases quoted are not necessarily to be regarded as having constituted a part of the Atharvan text for which the Prātiśākhya was composed.” This is a far more realistic explanation. Whitney did not suggest that these were merely “slips of memory on the part of the CA-writer,” as alleged by Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39). The reading as cited by Surya Kanta (p. 40), i.e. °sāma gāyati, is not supported either by Whitney, or by mss. H and N. २.२.१३. ऊधोऽम्नोभुवसाम् । Whitney (2.52). P: ऊध्सोम्नो°. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correc- tion. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of [the words] ūdhaḥ, amnaḥ, and bhuvaḥ [is not changed to r]. Notes: Whitney observes: “This rule is utterly idle in our treatise, since no precept has been given which should in any way require or authorize the conversion into r of the final of these words. The original form of ūdhas,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका319 however, is ūdhar, as is clearly shown by the comparison of the kindred lan- guages, …, and by its treatment in the Rig-Veda; and the Rik. Pr. … Neither of the other treatises takes notice of it or of either of the words here associated with it. All three, however, are noted by Pāṇini (viii.2.70, 71), as words which may or may not, in Vedic use, change their final into r.” The svarādi-gaṇa mentioned in P.1.1.37 (स्वरादिनिपातमव्ययम्), as given in Böhtlingk (1887: 144), includes bhuvar, amnas, and amnar. While Whitney is absolutely correct in saying that there is no rule in the CA to authorize the change of ḥ of these words into r, the very existence of the present rule, combined with the information given by Pāṇini, would make it understandable that this matter did weigh on the mind of the author of the CA. It seems that this rule may have been intended to distinguish the ŚAV recita- tional tradition from the traditions of the other Vedas. In the larger context of other traditions, the author of the CA assumes a possibility of the visarjanīya in these words being changed to r, perhaps unwittingly, and the present rule sim- ply wards off such a possibility. Clearly, the inherited texts of the AV, i.e. the Saṃhitāpāṭha and the Padapāṭha do not show a case of the visarjanīya of any of these words changing to r. Perhaps, the author of the CA was really concerned with such a change happening in cases of parihāra in the Kramapāṭha, such as would be occasioned for the word ūdhas in AV (8.10.12), where the word oc- curs at the end of the line: गा॒य॒त्र्य॑भि॒धान्य॒भ्रमूधः॑. With the present rule, the author of the CA perhaps wanted to ensure the parihāra as ऊध इत्यूधः, rather than as ऊधरित्यूधः. If the tradition of the AV was coming under an increasing influence of the RV tradition, then such a fear may be understandable. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऊधस्, अम्नस्, भुवस् इति न विसर्ज- नीयस्य रेफो भवति । ‘यो अ॑स्या॒ ऊधो॒ न वेद॑’ (अ.वे. १२.४.१८)। ‘ये अ॒म्नो जा॒तान्मा॒रय॑न्ति’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१९)। ‘भुवो॒ विश्वे॑षु॒ सव॑नेषु य॒ज्ञियः॑’ (ऋ.वे. १०.५०.४)। ‘भुवो॑ वि॒वस्वा॑न॒न्वा त॑तान’ (अ.वे. १८.२.३२)। Note: Surya Kanta says that the example भुवो॒ विश्वे॑षु॒ भुव॑नेषु य॒ज्ञियः॑ as a passage cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and he (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. Here again it is obvious that he has confused Whitney’s statements. Whitney says that the example भुवो॒ विश्वे॑षु॒ भुव॑नेषु य॒ज्ञियः॑ is found in

अध्याय २, पाद २ 320 the commentaries on Pāṇini (8.2.70, 71), and that the CAB gives भुवो॒ विश्वे॑षु॒ सव॑नेषु य॒ज्ञियः॑, which is not found in the AV. Now the new critical edition of the KV (Osmania University edn., Vol. 2, p. 927), based on mss. evidence gives exactly the same example as given by our commentary, and it refers it to RV 10.50.4, which is the same reference given for भुवो॒ विश्वे॑षु॒ भुव॑नेषु य॒ज्ञियः॑ by Surya Kanta. The text of RV 10.50.4 unambiguously reads savaneṣu and not bhuvaneṣu as cited by Surya Kanta. २.२.१४. अकारोपधस्योकारोऽकारे । Whitney (2.53). J, M, O: आकारो°. Translation: [A visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ], preceded by a, is changed to u, before a. Note: This rule works in conjunction with other rules. After the visa- rjanīya is changed to u, this u is combined with the preceding a to yield an o by CA (3.2.22: उवर्ण ओकारः), and then the following a is combined with the pre- ceding o to yield an o by CA (3.2.30: एकारौकारान्तात् पूर्वः पदादेरकारस्य). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अकारोपधस्य विसर्जनीयस्य उ(H, N: ओ, W: उ)कारो भवति अकारे परतः । ‘प॒रोऽपे॑ह्यसमृद्धे’ (अ.वे. ५.७.७)। ‘प॒रोऽपे॑हि मनस्पाप’ (अ.वे. ६.४५.१)। Note: The CAB, or perhaps the copyists, render the rule incorrectly by stating that the visarjanīya changes to o. That would have led to the word- ing of the original rule to be akāropadhasya+okāraḥ+akāre > akāropadhasyau- kāro ’kāre. This is not supported by any manuscript. Without noting the devi- ant explanation of the CAB, Whitney correctly translates: “visarjanīya be- comes u.” In fact, he cites the commentary as: akāropadhasya visarjanīyasyo ’kāro bhavati. However, this is a reading corrected by Whitney. The original reading of both the manuscripts is given above in the text. The commentary of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa on this rule (= PS 267) also correctly interprets this rule: अकारोपधस्य विसर्गस्य उकारो भवति अकारे परे ।. About the text of the rule as given by the manuscript H, Whitney comments: “This rule is much mutilated by the copyist, both in its first state- ment (akāro ’kāre) and in its final repetition (akāropadhasyokāre), so that its true form is only restorable from the commentator’s paraphrase. … Evidently

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका321 the triple recurrence of the syllables kāro, kāro, kāre bothered the copyist’s weak head, and he stumbled from the one to the other of them in an utterly helpless manner.” It is to Whitney’s credit that, in spite of the mutilated text in the manuscript H, he correctly guessed the proper wording of this rule, which is now fully confirmed by the second manuscript, N. Evidently, the copyist for the second manuscript did not have what Whitney called a “weak head,” and he was not bothered by the triple recurrence of the syllables kāro, kāro, and kāre. On the whole, the manuscript N presents a better state of the text of the com- mentary and the rules. It is also chronologically slightly earlier than the manu- script H. २.२.१५. घोषवति च । Whitney (2.54). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, preceded by a, is changed to u], also before a voiced [consonant]. Note: This rule works in conjunction with CA (3.2.22: उवर्ण ओकारः), which combines a and u into an o. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - घोषवति च परतः अकारोपधस्य विस- र्जनीयस्य उकारो भवति । ‘तथा॑ सप्तऋ॒षयो॑ विदुः’ (अ.वे. ४.११.९)। ‘तद्वै ब्र॑ह्म॒विदो॑ विदुः’ (अ.वे. १०.८.४३)। ‘तस्य॑ां नरो वपत॒ बीज॑मस्याम्’ (अ.वे. १४.२.१४)। २.२.१६. आकारोपधस्य लोपः । Whitney (2.55). A, B, D, M, P: अकारो°. Hb, Nb: °लोपलोपः. Translation: [A visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] preceded by ā, is deleted [before a voiced consonant]. Note: As Whitney notes, “the case of āḥ before a vowel was included in ii. 41 (= CA 2.2.2: svare yakāraḥ).” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आकारोपधस्य विसर्जनीयस्य घोषवति परतः लोपो भवति । ‘अ॒न॒मी॒वा वि॑व॒क्षवः॑’ (अ.वे. २.३०.

अध्याय २, पाद २ 322 ३)। ‘धीरा॑ दे॒वेषु॑’ (अ.वे. ३.१७.१)। ‘एक॑शतं॒ ता ज॒नता॒ या भूमिः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१८.१२)। २.२.१७. शेपहर्षणीं वन्दनेव वृक्षम् । Whitney (2.56). J, M: °वंदहनेव°. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, is also deleted in the ex- pressions] śepaharṣaṇīm [< śepaḥ+harṣaṇīm] and vandane ’va [< vandanaḥ+iva]. Note: By normal rules of sandhi, the first combination would have given us śepoharṣaṇīm and vandana[#]iva. Referring to the first of these two cases, Whitney says: “The former is a striking case of arbitrariness in etymologizing on the part of the authors of the pada-text, for there is neither necessity nor plausibility in treating the com- pound as if made up of śepas and harṣaṇa: the former member is evidently śepa, which in the Atharvan is much the more common of the two forms of this word.” On another occasion, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p.149) further adds: “The pada-reading of the last word is śepaḥ-harṣaṇīm, and Prāt ii.56 (= CA 2.2.17) prescribes the loss of the visarga of śepaḥ in saṃhitā; the comment to Prāt. iv.75(74?) (= CA 4.3.2) gives the reading thus: śepoharṣaṇīm iti śepaḥ- harṣaṇīm; and one of our pada-mss. presents it in the same form, adding kramakāle ‘this is the krama-reading’; and the comm. has śepoha-; but Ppp., śepaharṣiṇī. As śépa is as genuine and old a form as śépas, there seems to be no good reason for the peculiar treatment of the compound.” Whitney is clearly misguided in view of the fact that his own Index Verborum cites (p. 294) no other occurrence for śepa- than the expression śepaharṣaṇīm. On the other hand, it lists nine occurrences of śepas. This is also confirmed by A Grammatical Word-Index to Atharvaveda, VVRI, 1963. Thus, there is good justification for the treatment given to śepaharṣaṇīm by the present rule. Referring to the second case, he says: “As for the other case, of elision of the visarjanīya before iva and contraction of the two vowels into a diph- thong, it is equally surprising to find this one singled out to be so written, from among the many in the text which are to be so read.” Whitney’s more general comments are as follows: “For the contraction of a final syllable, ending either in an original s or m, with the following parti-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका323 cle of comparison iva, so that the two together form but two syllables, is the rule rather than the exception in the Atharva-Veda. Out of 59 instances in the text, in which a final aḥ occurs before iva, there are only 13 in which the metre shows the sandhi to be regular: in 46 cases we are to read e ’va; am iva is con- tracted in the same manner 25 times out of 40; āḥ iva, only 4 times out of 19; im iva, 3 times out of 5; iḥ iva, 7 times out of 10; uḥ iva, 6 times, or in every instance the text contains; um iva, only once out of 3 times: and there are single sporadic cases of a similar elision after the terminations eḥ, āu, ān, ad, ud, which would pass without notice, as mere irregularities of metre, were it not for their analogy with the others I have mentioned, but which, considering these latter, are worth adverting to, as illustrations of the same general ten- dency.” A primary fact Whitney fails to mention is that the rules in the CA are not given to account for those cases where modern scholars restore the irregu- lar meter to its regularity by assuming that the ‘original’ text read differently from what has been transmitted to us. The CA rules are not restorative in this sense, but descriptive of the Saṃhitāpāṭha and the Padapāṭha as they were re- ceived at that time. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शेपहर्षणीं वन्दनेव वृक्षमिति विसर्ज- नीयस्य लोपो भवति । ‘ओष॑धिं(H, N: धीं) शेप॒हर्ष॑णीम्’ (पद ! शे॒पः॒ऽहर्ष॑णीम्, अ.वे. ४.४.१)। ‘वन्द॑नेव वृ॒क्षम्’ (पद ! वन्द॑नःऽइव, अ.वे. ७.११५.२)। संहितायामित्येव। (क्रम !) ‘शेपोहर्षणीमिति शेपः हर्षणीम्’ । ‘वन्दन इवेति वन्दनः इव’ । Note: The VVRI edition of the AV cites the Padapāṭha for AV (7.120.2 = W: 7.115.2) as वन्द॑नाऽइव, and offers the variant वन्द॑नःऽइव in the footnotes. One should also note that the commentary of [Pseudo]-Sāyaṇa adopts the first of these readings (cf. वन्दना लताविशेषः), and shows no awareness of the reading as assumed by the CA. In this connection, it may also be noted that, as far as my reading of [Pseudo]-Sāyaṇa’s commentary goes, he shows no knowledge of the CA. This may also be explained by the fact that no manuscript of the CA has been found to the south of Maharashtra, and that it is likely that {Pseudo]-Sāyaṇa may have had no access to this text. Whitney points to a case which he believes the Prātiśākhya should have taken care of. This is the expression yakṣmodhām in AV (9.8.9). Whitney

अध्याय २, पाद २ 324 (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 550) says: “The pada-text reads in c yakṣmaḥ-dhā́m. The Prāt. takes no notice of the irregular form of the first member of the com- pound, as it does, superfluously (ii. 56 = CA 2.2.17), of the contrary treatment of śepas in śepa-harṣaṇīm.” Also see the Note on CA (3.2.12) for more possible examples which could have been listed under this rule. २.२.१८. एष स व्यञ्जने । Whitney (2.57). O: °व्यजने. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of the words eṣaḥ and saḥ [is deleted] before a consonant. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एषः सः इति व्यञ्जने परतः विसर्ज- नीयस्य लोपो भवति । ‘ए॒ष प्रि॒यः’ (अ.वे. २.३६.४)। ‘स सेन॑ां मोहयतु’ (अ.वे. ३.१.१)। Note: This rule is identical with the first pāda of APR (99). २.२.१९. न सस्पदीष्ट । Whitney (2.58). A, B, D: °ष्टः. J, M: °सस्यदीर्घः. O: नसस्यदीष्ट. P(orig): °दीर्घः. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, in the expression] sas padīṣṭa [< saḥ+padīṣṭa] is not [deleted]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न सस्पदीष्टेति विसर्जनीयस्य लोपो भवति । ‘अध॑रः॒ सस्प॑दीष्ट’ (अ.वे. ७.३१.१)। २.२.२०. दीर्घायुत्वायादिषु च । Whitney (2.59), F, Ha, Na, O: omit च. A, B, D: दीर्घायुत्वादिषु च. I: 20. P: °युत्वयोदि°. Translation: Also, in dīrghāyutvāya etc., [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, is dropped].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका325 Note: The syntax of this rule seems strange, especially coming after the previous rule. Normally, one would have expected the force of na in the previous rule to continue into this rule. However, the examples as given do indeed show the deletion of a theoretically possible visarjanīya, e.g. dīrghā- yutva < dīrghāyuḥ+tva. Whitney notes an important point that “in all these cases, it will be noticed, the lopa of the visarjanīya is made in the pada-text, as well as in saṃhitā, as is directed in a later rule (iv. 100 = CA 4.3.29: dīrghāyutvāyādīnāṃ ca).” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घायुत्वायादिषु विसर्जनीयस्य लोपो भवति । ‘दी॒र्घा॒यु॒त्वाय॑’ (अ.वे. १.२२.२)। ‘अथो॑ सहस्र- चक्षो॒ त्वम्’ (अ.वे. ४.२०.५)। ‘ब॒र्हि॒षदः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१. ४५, ५१)। Note: Whitney correctly assumes that in the first two examples, there is an actual substitution of the stems āyu and cakṣu, for the stems āyus and cakṣus. However, he has some hesitation in assuming a similar substitution of the stem barhi for barhis in the last example. The gaṇa referred to in this rule of the CA has been fully listed in the APR (200). The CAB cites the first three instances of this gaṇa, which con- tains a total of 10 instances. इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः । H, N: ॥५९॥ द्वितीयस्य द्वितीयपादः. C, E, F: द्वितीयस्य द्वितीयः पादः. A, B, D, J, M, P: द्वितीयः पादः. I: इति द्वितीयाध्याये द्वितीयः पादः. O: च. द्वितीयस्य द्वितीयः पादः ॥ सू.॥२०॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥५९॥ द्वितीयस्य द्वितीयः पादः ॥ __________________________________

॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ तृतीयः पादः ॥ २.३.१. दुर उकारो दाशे परस्य मूर्धन्यः । Whitney (2.60). Ha, Na: °मूर्द्धंन्यः. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of duḥ [< dur] is changed to u, before dāśa, and [the d] following [ḥ] is changed to a retroflex [ḍ]. Note: It is assumed that after duḥ+dāśa is changed to duu+ḍāśa, the two u vowels coalesce into a long ū, yielding the formation dūḍāśa. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दुर इति विसर्जनीयस्य उकारो भवति दाशे परतः परस्य च मूर्धन्यो भवति । ‘येना॑ दू॒डाशे॒ अस्य॑सि’ (अ.वे. १.१३.१)। संहितायामित्येव । (क्रम !) ‘दु॒र्दाश॒ इति॑ दुः॒ऽदाशे॑’ । अपर आह - ‘धानाशदाशदभध्ये(H, N: ये)षु लुप्यते उपधायाश्च दीर्घः तवर्गीयस्य टवर्गीय’ इति । ‘दूडाशः’ (‘दूडाशे,’ अ.वे. १.१३.१)। (missing: ‘दूणाशः,’ ऋ.वे.खिल. ४.४.१)। ‘दूडभः’ (not in AV, ‘दू॒ळभा॑सः,’ ऋ.वे. ७.६०.६)। ‘दूढ्यः’ (not in AV)। ‘अप॑(H, N: व) दू॒ढ्यो॑ जहि’ (ऋ.वे. १.९४.९)। Note: The commentary brings up an important issue by saying this change occurs only in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. We must interpret संहितायामित्येव as referring specifically to the Saṃhitāpāṭha, and not referring to the generic sandhi or the lack of a pause in between the recited items. Thus, the Padapāṭha reading duḥ / dāśe does not occasion this rule, because the components are separated by a short pause. However, in the parihāra of the Kramapāṭha, the word is first repeated with its components combined. Then it is followed by iti, followed by the repetition of the word broken into its components. In the first repetition, one would expect the normal sandhi rules to apply. Thus, we

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका327 have duḥ+dāśa changing to durdāśa. However, since this is not the Saṃhitāpāṭha, the present rule does not apply. The same important distinction between sandhi versus Saṃhitāpāṭha is found in several other cases, e.g. CA (2.2.17). It should be noted that the CA appropriately limits itself to the forma- tion dūḍāśa which is attested in the AV. However, the more generalized for- mulation appearing in the commentary extends the same procedure to other formations occurring elsewhere. Also note that while the generalized formula- tion includes dūṇāśa, Whitney points out that “the Atharvan has duḥ-naśa (v.11.6), but treats it according to the regular methods of combination, making durṇaśa in saṃhitā.” Thus, the generalized formulation, introduced with apara āha, seems to take care of dūṇāśa, which is not an Atharvan expression, and fails to take care of durṇaśa which is an Atharvan expression. Thus, the Vārttika-like passage cited by the commentary offers a glimpse into an unknown [non-Atharvan?] grammatical text. Compare the Vārttika (दुरो दाश- नाशदभध्येषु) on P.6.3.109, which is expanded by Patañjali to: दुरो दाशनाशदभ- ध्येषूत्वं वक्तव्यमुत्तरपदादेश्च ष्टुत्वम्. २.३.२. शुनि तकारः । Whitney (2.61). Translation: Before śun, [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of duḥ] is changed to t. Note: This rule helps the transition of the Padapāṭha reading duḥ / śunā to the Saṃhitāpāṭha reading ducchunā. The initial duḥ+śunā is changed to dut+śunā by this rule. Then, with the application of CA (2.1.13: तकारस्य शकारलकारयोः परसस्थानः) and CA (2.1.17: तवर्गीयाच्छकारः शकारस्य), we finally get ducchunā. Since the forms ducchunām and ducchunā are not analyzed into their components in the Padapāṭha, Whitney believes that this rule is “properly su- perfluous, and we have a right to wonder that it was introduced into our trea- tise.” The same sentiment is echoed by Surya Kanta (APR, p. 142). In my opinion, this rule, like several others, indicates that the author of the CA occa- sionally goes into grammatical analysis beyond the limits of the Padapāṭha, rather than this rule being a later addition to the text. All the manuscripts have the rule and the oldest commentary comments on it, and hence, if the rule is a ‘later’ addition, it must have taken place very early.

328अध्याय २, पाद ३ There is good reason why the Padapāṭha does not break this word down into its components. Its etymology is elusive. Sāyaṇa on RV (1.116.21) paraphrases the word with duṣṭasukha = duḥkhasya kartā, and says that the word suna refers to happiness. However, this word is not independently attested. Skandasvāmin paraphrases the word with durbhikṣa. Surya Kanta (1981: 343) derives it as dut+śuna, but then also seems to link it with the root du ‘burn.’ He quotes a paraphrase as duṣṭacitta for this word occurring in TS (iv.6.6.7). The denominative verb ducchunāyase in RV (7.55.3) is paraphrased by Sāyaṇa with bādhase, while ducchunāyate in VS (xix. 33) is paraphrased with daridraṃ karoti. Thus, this word would qualify for not being split into its components in the Padapāṭha, because of the confusion concerning its components, cf. sandeha in CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्). On the other hand, the present CA rule represents an humble effort to suggest an etymology for the word. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शुनि परतः दुरिति विसर्जनीयस्य तकारो भवति । ‘दु॒च्छुनां॒ ग्राम॑म्’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.४)। ‘तद्रा॒ष्ट्रं ह॑न्ति दु॒च्छुना॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१९.८)। २.३.३. समासे सकारः कपयोरनन्तःसद्यःश्रेयश्छन्दसाम् । Whitney (2.62). A, B: °सद्यश्रेयः छंदसां. D, M, O, P: °सद्यः श्रेयः छन्दसां. O: °श्रेयःश्छन्दसां. Translation: In a compound, [a visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, occurring at the end of the first member,] is changed to s, before k and p, except for the words antaḥ, sadyaḥ, śreyaḥ, and chandaḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समासे विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति कपयोः परतः अन्यत्र अन्तः सद्यः श्रेयः छन्दस् इत्येतेषाम् । ‘अ॒ध॒स्प॒दम्’ (अ.वे. २.७.२)। ‘पी॒ब॒स्फा॒कम्’ (अ.वे. ४.७. ३)। ‘न॒म॒स्का॒रेण॑’ (अ.वे. ४.३९.९)। ‘यो वि॒श्वत॑स्पाणिरु॒त वि॒श्वत॑स्पृथः’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२६)। अनन्तःसद्यःश्रेयश्छन्दसा- मिति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒न्तः॒को॒शमि॑व’ (अ.वे. १.१४.४)। ‘अ॒न्तः॒पा॒त्रे रेरि॑हतीम्’ (अ.वे. ११.९.१५)। ‘स॑द्यः॒क्रीः’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका329 (अ.वे. ११.७.१०)। ‘श्रेयः॑केतः’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.१०)। ‘छन्दः॑पक्षे’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१२)। परःपरः । पर इति चाम्रेडितसमासे न सकारो भवति । ‘त्वत्प॒रःप॑रः’ (अ.वे. १२.३.३९)। Note: The last counter-example, i.e. AV (12.3.39), cited by the com- mentary is not directly accounted for by the CA rule. Its very presence in the commentary suggests that either the commentator is adding something that the author of the Sūtras unintentionally left out, or that there was a change in the oral tradition, and that the commentator was faced with an instance which did not occur in the text as known to the author of the Sūtras. This instance is in- deed listed in the APR (201) as an exception, and it is clear that the CAB has recorded this exception from the APR. Whitney suggests another possibility that sequences of repeated words like paraḥ+paraḥ were perhaps not treated as compounds by the author of the Sūtras and hence he did not feel the need to make provision for this instance. On the other hand, it is clear that the com- mentator considers this an instance of compounding, and hence feels that he must explicitly exclude this instance from the operation of the rule. In any case, there is change in the tradition, either linguistic, theoretical, or both. Since this last instance has been explicitly accounted for by the APR (201, p. 120), it is clear that the CAB and the APR are following the same tradition, which is slightly different from the one reflected in the CA. Also see the Note on CA (4.1.62). This rule is cited in a slightly abbreviated form in APR (201, See: APR, Introduction, p. 20). However, identical examples are found under APR (201) and in the CAB on the present rule. As far as the prescription for sadyaḥkrīḥ is concerned, we should note that the later uniform usage of the derivative sādyaskra indicates that the prohi- bition on the change of Visarga to s in this form was not generally followed. Sāyaṇa’s reading is sadyaskrīḥ. On pībasphākam, Whitney says: “I would remark that its treatment by the pada-text, and its citation under this rule, seem to depend upon a false ety- mology, in as much as its final member is plainly not phāka, but sphāka, a word allied with sphāna and sphāti, repeatedly met with elsewhere.” On the same word in AV (4.7.3), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 155) says: “In b, all our mss. (as also the comment on Prāt. ii.62 = CA 2.3.3) read pībasphākám (p. pībaḥ-phākám, which the comment just quoted ratifies), as our edition

330अध्याय २, पाद ३ reads; SPP., on the other hand, prints pībaspākám (comm. pīvaspākam, ex- plained as ‘fat-cooking’) and declares this to be the unanimous reading of his authorities: this discordance of testimony is quite unexplainable. The transla- tion implies emendation of the pada-reading to pībaḥ-sphākám.” Lanman fur- ther adds (ibid.): “In a supplementary note, Roth reports: Ppp. has pivassākam; R. has, p.m., pibaspā-, corrected to pībasphā-; T. has pīvaspā-.” On chandaḥpakṣe in AV (8.9.12), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 509) says: “The Pet. Lexx. give the first word in the form chā́ndaspakṣa, al- though Prāt. ii. 62 expressly requires -aḥpa-, and all the mss. read it except Bp., which has -aṣpa-.” २.३.४. निर्दुराविर्हविरसमासेऽपि । Whitney (2.63). P does not have a daṇḍa between this rule and the next. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] niḥ, duḥ, āviḥ, and haviḥ [becomes s before k and p], even where there is no com- pounding. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - निः दुः आविः हविः इत्येतेषाम् अस- मासेऽपि विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति । निः । ‘कुष्ठ॒(H, N: ष्ट)स्तत्सर्वं॒ निष्क॑रत्’ (अ.वे. ५.४.१०)। निः । दुः । ‘दु॒ष्कृ॒तम्’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.४)। ‘दुष्पीतम्’ (not in AV)। ‘दुराविः(H: वः, N: वाः)’ । ‘आ॒विष्कृ॑णुष्व रू॒पाणि॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२०.५)। ‘आविष्कृणुते रूपाणि’ (variant for AV 12.4. 29c)। आविः । हविः । ‘ह॒विष्कृ॒ण्वन्तः॑ परिवत्स॒रीण॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.५)। ततोऽपवदति । ‘ह॒विः पु॑रो॒डाश॑म्’ (अ.वे. १८.४.२)। Note: Whitney says: “The particle duḥ never appears in the Atharvan text except as compounded with other words, but it would seem from this rule that the compounds which it forms are not entitled to the name samāsa.” However, with respect to any cited form, a conclusion whether it is or it is not a case of compound (samāsa) cannot be automatically be drawn, because the condition stated in the rule, ‘even when there is no compounding,’ allows for

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका331 examples of compounds, as well as non-compounds. In general, words like niḥ are not viewed as being compounded with finite verbs, but are viewed as being compounded with verbal nouns. A somewhat similar distinction seems to hold in Pāṇini’s system, cf. P.8.4.14 (उपसर्गादसमासेऽपि णोपदेशस्य) and P.7.1.37 (समासेऽनञ्पूर्वे क्त्वो ल्यप्). All the AV mss. used by Whitney retain the visarjanīya in निः क्र॒व्याद॑म् (AV 12.2.16, 42) and निः पृ॑थि॒व्याः (AV 16.7.6), and so does Whitney’s edition. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 38) suggests that here we have the non- Śaunakīya readings preserved in the mss. Concerning the passage आविष्कृणुते रूपाणि which is not attested in the AV, Surya Kanta (ibid, p. 40) makes a sug- gestion that it may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension, and that the currently available AV text is not genuinely Śaunakīya. Somehow, he does not raise the same claim about the example duṣpītam cited by the commentary which is also not attested in the AV. The example duṣpītam is cited by the KV on Pāṇini (8.3.41: इदुदुपधस्य चाप्रत्ययस्य), and it is likely that our commentator cited it from such a source. To illustrate the condition असमासेऽपि, the commen- tator seems to have found examples of mostly finite verbs with the associated words like nir. However, when it came to dur, it would seem that he was hard- pressed to find examples of such finite verbs. Thus, he was forced to come up with examples of non-finite forms, out of which one is attested in the AV, and the other the commentator found in commentaries on Pāṇini. One need not posit for this a so-called lost genuine Śaunakīya text of the AV. The exception introduced by the commentary with the words ततोऽपवदति is important. This exception is not directly accounted for by the CA rule, nor has it been accounted for in the APR. This makes one suspect that the text of the AV as known to the author of the commentary was perhaps slightly differ- ent as compared to the text as known to the authors of the CA and the APR. Whitney’s edition of the AV follows the statement in the commentary, but it is not clear whether the manuscripts of the AV follow this prescription. The VVRI edition also seems to follow the prescription as given in the commen- tary. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 698) suggests another possibility for आविष्कृणुते रूपाणि. For AV (12.4.29c), some mss. read आविष्कृणुते रूपाणि, while others read आविष्कृणुष्व रूपाणि. Whitney says: “The translation implies in b the reading kr̥ṇute instead of kr̥ṇuṣva, although the former is found only in O.p.m.D.T. ∀Three of SSP’s pada-mss. have kr̥ṇute.# The comm. to Prāt. ii.63 quotes āviṣ kr̥ṇute rūpāṇi, which is not found in the text unless here.” Thus there is no reason to say that this passage is not at all found in the AV. The simplest assumption would be that the CAB knew this reading for AV

332अध्याय २, पाद ३ 12.4.29c. The only other known Vedic text which uses आविष्कृणुते is Jaiminīya- Brāhmaṇa (3.96), but here it does not co-occur with rūpāṇi. २.३.५. त्रिः । Whitney (2.64). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] triḥ [is changed to s, before k and p]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - त्रिरिति विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति। ‘अ॒पा॒लामि॑न्द्र॒ त्रिष्पू॒त्वा’ (अ.वे. १४.१.४१)। ‘त्रिष्क्र- (ष्कृ?)त्वा’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘त्रिष्प्रकारेण’ (not in Vedic texts)। २.३.६. कुरुकरंकरत्कृणोतुकृतिकृधिष्वकर्णयोः । Whitney (2.65). D, J: °कुरुकरंकरकृ°. O adds daṇḍa after करत्. P: °षि- ष्वकर्णयोः. Translation: [A visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] except that of karṇayoḥ, [is changed to s], before the words kuru, karam, karat, kr̥ṇotu, kr̥ti, and kr̥dhi. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - कुरु करं करत् कृणोतु कृति कृधि इत्येतेषु परतोऽकर्णयोः विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति । कुरु। ‘पि॒तृभ्य॑श्च॒ नम॑स्कुरु’ (अ.वे. १४.२.२०)। कुरु । करम् । ‘सु॒ब॒द्धाम॒मुत॑स्करम्’ (अ.वे. १४.१.१८)। करम् । करत् । ‘स नमस्करत्’ (Whitney: ‘सम्म॑नस॒स्कर॑त्,’ अ.वे. ७.९४.१)। करत् । कृणोतु । कृणोत्वित्यत्र त्रिधात्विति वक्तव्यम् । ‘दी॒र्घमायु॑ष्कृणोतु’ (अ.वे. ६.७८.३)। ‘अ॒ग्नि- ष्कृ॑णोतु भेष॒जम्’ (अ.वे. ६.१०६.३)। ‘म॒णिष्कृ॑णोतु देव॒- जाः’ (अ.वे. १०.६.३१)। कृणोतु । कृति । ‘तस्य॒ त्वम॑सि॒ निष्कृ॑तिः’ (अ.वे. ५.५.४)। कृति । कृधि । ‘अ॒नमि॒त्रं पु॒र-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका333 स्कृ॑धि’ (अ.वे. ६.४०.३)। ‘सेमं निष्कृधि पूरुषम्’ (अ.वे. ५.५.४)। अकर्णयोरिति किमर्थम् । ‘मि॒थु॒नं कर्ण॑योः कृधि’ (अ.वे. ६.१४१.२)। Note: Whitney says: “The cases to which this rule is meant to apply are of very different frequency of occurrence, and the rule itself is of very dif- ferent degrees of accuracy as concerns the forms mentioned. … Not much can be said in praise of the way in which this rule is constructed.” While Whitney’s frustration is understandable, one must also deal with the fact that he is comparing the text of the AV as we know it today with the rules of the CA which were formulated more than two thousands years ago, and we must make allowance for change in the transmitted text, before assigning blame to the author of the CA. This rule is especially a good example for illustrating the possibility of such changes occurring in the transmitted text. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 41) brings up a very interesting difference between the CA and the APR. The CAB says that the change of visarjanīya to ṣ before kr̥ṇotu occurs only in three cases listed there. On the other hand, the APR (148) refers to the same three passages and says: कृणोत्वित्यत्र त्रिधातु सत्वं न. Surya Kanta points out that the Vulgate mss. follow the APR, and not the CA prescription, and retain the visarjanīya in these cases. This, to Surya Kanta, implies that the Vulgate is not a Śaunakīya text. While not denying the facts pointed out by Surya Kanta, one can think in terms of possible change within the same tradition over a period of time. Such a change could have occurred even between the period of CA and that of the CAB. It is indeed conceivable that the CA did not think of the kind of limitations sug- gested by the CAB, but that the CAB is making a reference to a changed situation. If such a possibility is granted, one can then think of further change reflected in the APR. Does the APR project a reverse situation, i.e. that there could be an s for the visarjanīya before kr̥ṇotu in all other instances, except these three? Or does it say that in the three cases, where the CAB prescribed the change, no such change occurs, and in these cases, we get a visarjanīya, as we get it elsewhere before kr̥ṇotu. One would have to accept the second alter- native, in view of the testimony of the manuscripts. Whitney says: “In all these (= three) passages, however, the manuscripts read, without dissent, visarjanīya before the k. … Other instances in which kr̥ṇotu has an unaltered visarjanīya before it are tolerably numerous. … They are vi.40.1, 2; 53.3; 73.3; 83.1; 104.3; vii.32.1; 33.1; 51.1; 91.1; viii.8.4; ix.2.7; 4.2; xi.1.6; xii.1.1, 43.” In all these

334अध्याय २, पाद ३ cases, the VVRI edition records a visarjanīya before kr̥ṇotu, and there are no manuscript varients recorded. Thus, instead of simply talking about two differ- ent recensions represented by these two texts, one could make a better case for a possible historical change within the same tradition: 1) CA - Unconditional change of visarjanīya to s before kr̥ṇotu. 2) CAB - This change occurs only in three instances. 3) APR - The above change does not occur in any instances. Surya Kanta’s conceptions are based on several assumptions. The first is that the oral (or even written) textual traditions, once codified by some scholar-sage, were essentially immutable. The second assumption is that the CAB actually forms part of the text of the original CA, and hence the examples and everything else seen in the CAB was somehow identical with the expec- tations of the original CA. In my opinion, both of these assumptions are seri- ously questionable. The general direction of possible change in the language is further supported by the following observations of W.S. Allen (1053: 51): “In later, though still ancient, times there appears to have been a tendency for -ḥ to extend its usage to contexts other than in pausa. The earliest of these exten- sions was to the position before the initial fricatives ś-, ṣ-, s-, where it replaced the homorganic final -ś, -ṣ, -s (indraś śūraḥ > indraḥ śūraḥ, &c.). This practice was then extended to the position before the velar and labial voiceless stops: in connexion with this innovation we find mentioned the names of Āgniveśya, Vālmīki, Śākalya, and the Mādhyandina school, whilst the ancient grammarian Śākaṭāyana is quoted as holding to the more conservative practice.” Allen also refers to A.H. Fry’s view that “the spread of -ḥ was due to the writers of Clas- sical Sanskrit operating with a phonemic orthography.” On the inclusion of kr̥ti in this rule, Whitney remarks: “The next word, kr̥ti, is one which, for a double reason, has no right to a place in the rule: in the first place, it occurs nowhere except in compounds; and secondly, it converts into a sibilant only the preceding visarjanīya of niḥ and haviḥ, and so would be sufficiently provided for by rule 63 (= CA 2.3.4), even if not adjudged to fall under rule 62 (= CA 2.3.3).” On म॒णिष्कृ॑णोतु in AV (10.6.31), Whitney and Lanman (AV Transl. Vol. II., p. 588) point out: “According to Prāt. ii.65 (= CA 2.3.6), we ought to read maṇíṣ kr̥- ; ∀this is the reading of three of SPP’s mss., but of none of W’s so far as noted: both texts give maṇíḥ#.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका335 २.३.७. ततस्परौ ब्रह्मपरे । Whitney (2.66). O: °म्ह°. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] tataḥ [is changed to s], before the word pari followed by the word brahma. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तत इति विसर्जनीयस्य परौ परतः सकारो भवति । ब्रह्मपरे । ‘तत॒स्परि॒ ब्रह्म॑णा’ (अ.वे. १. १०.१)। ब्रह्मण इति किमर्थम् । ‘ततः॒ परि॒ प्रजा॑तेन’ (अ.वे. ६.८९.१)। Note: Whitney points out: “A similar case, in which the suffix taḥ be- comes tas before pari, is सि॒न्धु॒तस्परि॑ (iv.10.4 and vii.45.1); the Prātiśākhya takes no notice of it, if it be not intended to be included in the gaṇa with which the section concludes (ii. 80 = CA 2.3.21).” This gaṇa, as we now know, is fully listed under APR (203, p. 121-2), and contains 12 instances. Yet, interestingly enough, it does not contain the instance cited above by Whitney, i.e. सि॒न्धु॒तस्परि॑. However, that instance could be taken care of by the next rule, i.e. CA (2.3.8). The example is listed neither among the positive cases for changing the visarjanīya to s, nor among exceptions to APR (202, p. 120-1). My under- standing of the APR lists under this rule (i.e. APR 202) is that the list of posi- tive examples is merely illustrative, while the list of exceptions is a complete list. Since सि॒न्धु॒तस्परि॑ does not appear in the list of exceptions, it could have been most likely a case of the positive change of visarjanīya to s. The fact that there are no manuscript varients listed for this instance by any of the editions of the AV also probably points in the same direction. २.३.८. पञ्चम्याश्चाङ्गेभ्यः पर्यादिवर्जम् । Whitney (2.67). Translation: Also, [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of an ablative form [is changed to an s, before pari], except in aṅgebhyaḥ pari etc. Note: Whitney points out: “The Rik Pr. (iv. 15) and Vāj. Pr. (iii. 30) give the additional specification that the pari must be at the end of a pāda, or before a pause, and the addition of that restriction to our own rule would have

336अध्याय २, पाद ३ made it accurate, and obviated the necessity of the gaṇa.” Whitney records, in a footnote, the instances and the counter-instances for this rule. Since the APR (202, pp. 120-1) also contains similar lists of instances and counter-instances, it is well worth comparing Whitney’s listing with the APR listing. Whitney’s list of positive instances matches with the one given under APR (202), except that Whitney also adds AV (xix.39.1, 5), and, he, for some reason, does not think of adding सि॒न्धु॒तस्परि॑ (AV iv.10.4 and vii.45.1) to this list. The lists of exceptions, have important mismatches: Whitney’s list of exceptions includes 10.7.25, 13.1.26, besides several instances from the l9th Kāṇḍa, which are not included in the APR list. On the other hand, the APR list of exceptions in- cludes 3.6.1, 6.89.1, 1.27.1, 4.33.6, and 9.5.6. These cases are not included in Whitney’s list of exceptions. Thus, there are major discrepancies, suggesting the possibility of changes in the textual transmission of the ŚAV after the com- pletion of the APR. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पञ्चम्याश्च विसर्जनीयस्य परौ परतः सकारो भवति । अङ्गेभ्यः पर्यादिवर्जम् । ‘कुष्ठो॑(H, N: ष्टो) हि॒मव॑त॒स्परि॑’ (अ.वे. १९.३९.१)। ‘जा॒तं हि॒मव॑त॒स्परि॑’ (अ.वे. ४.९.९; ५.४.२)। ‘वि॒द्युतो॒ ज्योति॑ष॒स्परि॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१०.१)। अङ्गेभ्यः पर्यादिवर्जमिति किमर्थम् । ‘प्रा॒णम- ङ्गे॑भ्यः॒ पर्या॒चर॑न्तम्’ (अ.वे. २.३४.५)। Note: In a footnote on p. 109, Whitney details instances and counter- instances for this rule. Surya Kanta wishes to use the examples cited by the commentary and the CA rule itself to argue that the CA and the APR belong to two different recensions of the AV. He points out (APR, Introduction, pp. 40- 1) that the APR (202) prescribes the same operation as the present rule in CA, but in the APR the gaṇa list of exceptions begins with पुमा॑न्पुं॒सः परि॑जातः (अ.वे. ३.६.१), the second exception listed being प्रा॒णमङ्गे॑भ्यः॒ पर्या॒चर॑न्तम् (अ.वे. २.३४.५). Why should the list of exceptions in the CA begin with the second example in the APR list? Surya Kanta argues: “Either CA has omitted púmān puṃsáḥ, or APR has added it afterwards. In any case the result is unmistakable. While the APR negatives satva in the passage, CA seems to imply it, thus showing that the two schools are different.” Surya Kanta also forgets to point out that the first positive example of such a change offered by the commentary, i.e. कुष्ठो॑ हि॒मव॑त॒स्परि॑ is absent from the list of examples provided by the APR (202). This example is from the 19th Kāṇḍa of the AV, and both the CA and the APR

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका337 rarely cite from anything beyond the first 18 Kāṇḍas. It is possible that this is a later addition to the text of the commentary. One more possibility omitted by Surya Kanta from consideration is that the pronunciation may have changed in the period between the CA and the APR, making it necessary for the latter to list or omit a passage. Such a change could have occurred within the same school. See the Note on the previous rule for a discussion of the example sin- dhutas pari (AV, iv.10.4 and vii.45.1). २.३.९. दिवस्पृथिव्यां सचतिवर्जम् । Whitney (2.68). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] divaḥ [is changed to s] before the word pr̥thivī, except [when it is followed by a form of] the verb sac. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दिव इति विसर्जनीयस्य पृथिव्यां परतः सकारो भवति । ‘दि॒वस्पृ॑थि॒व्या अ॒न्तरि॑क्षात्समु॒द्रात्’ (अ.वे. ९.१.१)। ‘दि॒वस्पृ॑थि॒वीम॒भि ये सृ॒जन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२७.४)। सचतिवर्जमिति किमर्थम् । ‘आ य॑न्ति दि॒वः पृ॑थि॒वीं स॑चन्ते’ (अ.वे. १२.३.२६)। Note: Whitney comments: “The text affords three others, viz. vi.100. 3; 125.2; xix.3.1. The only counter instance is that mentioned in the rule.” २.३.१०. पृष्ठे च । Whitney (2.69). O, P: पृष्टे च. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of the word divaḥ is changed to s] also before the word pr̥ṣṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पृष्ठे च परतः दिव इति विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति । ‘दि॒वस्पृ॒ष्ठे धाव॑मानं सुप॒र्णम्’ (अ.वे. १३. २.३७)। दिव इत्येव । ‘भूम्याः॑ पृ॒ष्ठे व॑द’ (अ.वे. ५.२०. ६)।

338अध्याय २, पाद ३ Note: The exception cited by the CAB, i.e. भूम्याः॑ पृ॒ष्ठे व॑द, is listed in APR (147e). Whitney lists several more instances of this change: iv.14.2, xi.5.10, xii.2.12, xiii.4.1, and xviii.1.61. He further points out: “The original sibilant of divas also maintains itself before p in two other cases, viz. divas putrau (viii.7.20) and divas payaḥ (xix.44.5). With the latter our treatise has nothing to do: the former it lets fall, apparently, into the barathrum of the gaṇa which closes the subject and the section (rule 80 = CA 2.3.21).” The rāyaspo- ṣādigaṇa referred to in CA (2.3.21) is listed at length under APR (203, pp. 121-2), and yet it does not contain the instance दि॒वस्पु॒त्रौ. Either we must as- sume that the listing under APR (203) was only illustrative, or we need to ac- cept the possibility of textual change after the period of APR. २.३.११. यः पतौ गवामस्याः परवर्जम् । Whitney (2.70). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of] yaḥ [is changed to s] before pati, except when [the word yaḥ is preceded by] gavām or asyāḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - य इति विसर्जनीयस्य पतौ परतः सकारो भवति । गवामस्याः परवर्जम् । ‘दि॒व्यो ग॑न्ध॒र्वो भुव॑नस्य॒ यस्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२.१)। ‘मृ॒डाद्ग॑न्ध॒र्वो भुव॑नस्य॒ यस्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. २.२.२)। ‘धा॒ता वि॑धा॒ता भुव॑नस्य॒ यस्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.३.९)। गवामस्याः परवर्जमिति किम- र्थम् । ‘गवां॒ यः पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.४.१७)। ‘दी॒र्घायु॑रस्या॒ यः पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. १४.२.२)। Note: The first two instances cited in APR (147e) are identical with the two exceptions referred to by the words gavām and asyāḥ in our rule, and fully by the CAB. Whitney cites two more cases of भुव॑नस्य॒ यस्पति॑:, i.e. AV (13.3.7) and AV (19.20.2). Then he makes an interesting remark: “One cannot but think that a better form for the closing restriction of the rule would have been “whenever bhuvanasya precedes.” One should also note that the word para is used in this rule in a way different from its use in other rules, cf. CA (2.3.7: ततस्परौ ब्रह्मपरे). In the present rule, in view of the known examples, the word is interpreted as “when yaḥ is preceded by gavām or asyāḥ,” or “when

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका339 yaḥ follows gavām or asyāḥ.” In CA (2.3.7), brahmapare is interpreted in an opposite way: “when the word pari is followed by the word brahma.” २.३.१२. षष्ठ्याश्चाशच्याः । Whitney (2.71). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] genitive form, except śacyāḥ, is also [changed to s, before the word pati]. Note: As Whitney points out, “the cases coming under this rule are almost innumerable, and it would be a waste of labor to specify them in full. … The only exception is that which the rule mentions.” The manuscripts of the AV do seem to follow the prohibition regarding the formation शच्याः पतिः. No ms. records the form शच्यास्पतिः. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - षष्ठ्या इति विसर्जनीयस्य पतौ परतः सकारो भवति अशच्याः । ‘वा॒चस्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. १.१.१)। ‘उ॒षस्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. १६.६.६)। ‘ब्रह्म॑ण॒स्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ६. ४.१)। ‘जग॑त॒स्पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.१७.१)। अशच्या इति किमर्थम् । ‘अरा॑त्याः॒ शच्याः॒ पतिः॑’ (अ.वे. १३.४.४७)। २.३.१३. इडायास्पदे । Whitney (2.72). P: इडायाःस्पदे. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of the word iḍāyāḥ [is changed to s] before the word pada. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इडाया इति विसर्जनीयस्य पदे परतः सकारो भवति । ‘इडा॑यास्प॒दम्’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.६)। इडा- यास्पदे । इडाया इति किमर्थम् । ‘ह॒स्ति॒न्याः प॒देन॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७०.२)। Note: The counter example हस्तिन्याः पदेन cited by the CAB is also listed under APR (147e). Referring to इडस्पदे in AV (6.63.4), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 329) remarks that “the prescription in that rule (= CA 2.3.13)

340अध्याय २, पाद ३ of s as the final of only iḍāyās before pada seems a strong indication that this verse (= AV 6.63.4) was not a part of the AV text as recognized by the Prāt.” On the present rule, Whitney says: “That the rule is not so framed as to include also the closely analogous case iḍas pade (vi.63.4), the only other one in the text where an original final sibilant is preserved before pada, gives reason to suspect that the verse containing it was not in the commentator’s Atharvan: a suspicion which is supported by the peculiar mode of occurrence of the verse, at the end of hymn with the subject of which it has nothing to do. It looks as if it had been thrust in at the end of vi.63, because in the Rik text (x. 191) it pre- ceded the verses of which vi.64 is composed.” There are some curious facts which must be mentioned. The text of the commentary repeats इडायास्पदे after citing the actual AV example इडा॑यास्प॒दम्, before proceeding to ask the question इडाया इति किमर्थम्. This is highly un- usual, and one wonders whether this was a misreading for an intended original इडस्पदे. Such a suspicion is strengthened by the fact that the APR (203, p. 121) actually lists the case इडस्पदे. However, it is of course possible that the example was not part of the AV known to the CA and the CAB, and was incorporated in it by the time of APR. २.३.१४. पितुष्पितरि । Whitney (2.73), A, B, D, H, J, K, M, N, and P read पितुः पितरि. Other mss. read: पितुष्पितरि. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of the word pituḥ [is changed to s] before the forms of pitr̥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पितुरिति विसर्जनीयस्य पितरि परतः सकारो भवति । ‘यस्तानि॒ वेद॒ स पि॒तुष्पि॒तास॑त्’ (अ.वे. २. १.२)। ‘यस्ता वि॑जा॒नात् स पि॒तुष्पि॒तास॑त्’ (अ.वे. ९.९. १५)। Note: Whitney’s manuscript, our H, contained only the first example, and Whitney recorded the second one in his notes: “a similar phrase is found once more in the text (at ix.9.15)”. This second example is now found in the manuscript N. Whitney further says: “On the other hand, we have three cases in the eighteenth book (xviii.2.49; 3.46, 59) in which pituḥ stands before pitaraḥ, and,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका341 by the unanimous authority of the manuscripts, maintains its visarjanīya. We must suppose either that the Prātiśākhya and its commentator overlooked these passages, or that they did not stand in the text contemplated by them, or that they stood there with the reading pituṣ pitaraḥ.” In all these cases, the VVRI edition also offers a reading with the visarjanīya, and does not cite any manu- script varients in favor of its change to ṣ. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 38) argues that such violations by the Vulgate text of the AV of the rules of the CA should be interpreted to mean that the Vulgate is not the Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the CA must be referring to a genuinely Śaunakīya recension which we do not possess today. It is curious to note that while the CAB does not explicitly note any ex- ceptions, the APR (147, p. 101) lists ये नः॑ पि॒तुः पि॒तरो॒ ये पि॑ताम॒हाः, AV (xviii.2.49; 3.46, 59) as an exception to the change of ḥ to s. Since neither the CA nor the CAB show any awareness of this exception, and since the APR explicitly lists it as an exception, the most likely conclusion is that the text of the AV as known to the CA and the CAB did not have this exception, but that the exception had developed prior to the listings made by the APR. Referring to the mss. variants regarding this phrase in AV (9.9.15), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., 554) says: “Some of our mss. (P.s.m.O.K.T.) read pitúḥ p- in d; we had the phrase once before, at ii.1.2, and the combination falls under Prāt. ii.73 (= CA 2.3.14).” २.३.१५. द्यौश्च । Whitney (2.74). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of the word dyauḥ [is] also [changed to s, before a form of pitr̥]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्यौरिति विसर्जनीयस्य पितरि परतः सकारो भवति । ‘द्यौष्पित॑र्या॒वय॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.३)। ‘द्याै॒ष्पितः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.३)। ‘न्यङ् अ॑ध॒राङ्’ (H, N:‘न्यध- राङ्,’) (अ.वे. ५.२२.२)। Note: Referring to the Vulgate mss. for AV (6.4.3), Whitney says: “All mss., but one, retain visarjanīya.” All manuscripts, except I and H, give dyauṣ in AV 3.9.1 and so does Whitney’s edition. However, later Whitney

342अध्याय २, पाद ३ (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 98) says “SSP. reads in b dyāúḥ p-, which is doubtless preferable to our dyāúṣ p-; it is read by the majority of his mss. and by part of ours (H.I.K); Ppp. also has it.” At AV (3.23.6, and 8.7.2), almost all mss. re- tain the visarjanīya, and so does Whitney’s edition. On the reading in this verse, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 128) reports: “The first half verse is found again later, as viii.7.2.c,d; in both places, part of the mss. read dyāúṣ p- (here only our O., with half of SPP’s); and that appears to be required by Prāt. ii-74 (= CA 2.3.15), although the looser relation of the two words favors in a case like this the reading dyāúḥ, which both editions present.” Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p.38) refers to this situation and argues that the Vulgate of the AV is not Śaunakīya, but that there is a mixture of the Śaunakīya readings at times in the existing mss. The example AV (6.4.3) is cited as example 21 under APR (28b, p. 27) with ṣ, rather than with the visarjanīya. The tenden- cies in the manuscripts of the AV, in this case, seem to show a further shift away from ṣ. Such a change is clearly more in the direction of the tendencies reflected in the classical language. See: Allen (1953: 51). The example न्यङ् अ॑ध॒राङ् has no place here. The examples द्याै॒ष्पितः॑ (AV 6.4.3) and न्यङ् अ॑ध॒राङ् (AV 5.22.2) are cited consecutively under APR (53, p. 43), and it is possible that the copyist for the CAB, who may also have copied the APR, confused the citations. This is the best explanation for why these two otherwise unrelated examples might have been juxtaposed in the manuscripts of the CAB. The confusion must have been fairly old to have been found in both the manuscripts H and N. २.३.१६. आयुष्प्रथमे । Whitney (2.75), D, H, J, M, N, and P: आयुः प्रथमे. Other mss: आयुष्प्रथमे. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of the word āyuḥ [is changed to s], before prathama. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आयुरिति विसर्जनीयस्य प्रथमे परतः सकारो भवति । ‘आयु॑ष्प्रथ॒मं प्र॒जां पोष॑म्’ (अ.वे. ४.३९.२)। Note: On this rule, Whitney says that all the AV mss. without dissent read visarjanīya whereas the CA rule expects ṣ in the example cited by the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका343 commentator. In this case, in his edition of the AV, Whitney disregards the unanimous authority of the mss. and follows the CA. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 38) refers to this situation and says that Whitney’s decision is arbitrary. However, note that the APR does not record these cases as excep- tions to the change of visarjanīya to s, and the best guess is that the APR knew these cases with the change. In Surya Kanta’s opinion, the AV mss. in this case represent a non- Śaunakīya recension. On the cited example, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 216) says: “Our edition combines ā́yuṣ pr-, because required by Prāt. ii.75 (= CA 2.3.16); but the mss., except one of SPP’s have ā́yuḥ pr-, which SPP. retains.” Here too, the manuscripts of the AV seem to indicate a progression toward the maintenance of the visarjanīya, cf. Allen (1953: 51). In this case, the shift away from the change of visarjanīya > s > ṣ, may have begun after the completion of the APR. २.३.१७. प्रे मुषिजीवपरे । Whitney (2.76). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, of the word āyuḥ is changed to s] before pra, when it is followed by a form of the verb muṣ or jīv. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रे परतः मुषिजीवपरे आयुरिति विसर्जनीयस्य सकारो भवति । ‘मा न॒ आयु॒ष्प्र मो॑षीः’ (अ.वे. ८.२.१७)। ‘दी॒र्घमायु॒ष्प्र जी॒वसे॑’ (अ.वे. १८.२.३)। मुषिजीवपर इति किमर्थम्। ‘जी॒वाना॒मायुः॒ प्र ति॑र’ (अ.वे. १२.२.४५)। Note: Whitney points out that all the mss. for AV (8.2.17 and 18.2.3) read āyuḥ, and he accepts this reading in his edition. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p.38) points out how arbitrary Whitney’s decisions generally are, and that the manuscripts represent a non-Śaunakīya recension. The Śaunakīya readings as defined by the CA are not always available in the existing AV manuscripts. Regarding AV (18.2.3), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 832) himself says: “The Prāt. (ii. 76 = CA 2.3.17) distinctly requires ā́yuṣ prá to be read in d, but of our mss. only O.s.m. (in margin) gives it; nearly half of SPP’s saṃhitā-mss., however, have it, and it ought to be received as the true AV. text,

344अध्याय २, पाद ३ though both editions read ā́yuḥ.” A case such as this suggests that one needs to carefully investigate the groupings of the manuscripts to detect slightly divergent traditions of the transmission of the AV, and see if they are consistent in following or not following the rules of the CA. On the whole, it still seems that there is a general movement away from the change of visarja- nīya > s, a direction discussed by Allen (1953: 51). Since the APR (147, p. 101) explicitly lists AV (12.2.45) as an ex- ception to the change of visarjanīya to s, as listed here by the CAB, one may assume that the APR knew other instances as involving this change, and the wholesale movement in the direction away from this change and toward the maintenance of the visarjanīya can be dated after the APR. २.३.१८. परिधिष्पतातौ । Whitney (2.77), Ha, J, K, Na: परिधिः पतातौ. Other mss: परिधिष्पतातौ. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of paridhiḥ [is changed to s] before patāti. Note: Whitney notes: “The manuscripts are unanimous in supporting the reading prescribed by the Prātiśākhya.” However, note that the VVRI edi- tion notes the Paippalāda variant as परिधिः पताति. The example cited by the commentary is not listed among exceptions to the change of visarjanīya to s by the APR, and one may assume that the APR knew this case as involving this change. Why the manuscript tradition should maintain this change, when in other cases it moves in the direction of keeping the visarjanīya needs to be explored. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परिधिरिति विसर्जनीयस्य पतातौ परतः सकारो भवति । ‘यथा॒ सो अ॒स्य प॑रि॒धिष्पता॑ति’ (अ.वे. ५.२९.२,३)। २.३.१९. निवतस्पृणातौ । Whitney (2.78). Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of nivataḥ [is changed to s] before pr̥ṇāti.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका345 Note: Whitney notes that the reading with s is supported by all of his manuscripts. The VVRI edition also shows no manuscript variants in this re- spect. The example listed by the CAB is not included among the exceptions to the change of visarjanīya to s listed by the APR, and hence one may assume that the APR knew this example with the change to s. Again, it needs to be investigated why this case has been resistant to the general direction of moving toward maintaining the visarjanīya. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - निवत इति विसर्जनीयस्य पृणातौ परतः सकारो भवति । ‘या(H, N: यो) विश्वा॑ नि॒वत॑- स्पृ॒णाति॑’ (अ.वे. ६.२२.३)। २.३.२०. मनस्पापे । Whitney (2.79). C, Hb, J, K, O: °स्यापे. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [The visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ,] of manaḥ [is changed to s] before pāpa. Note: Whitney has an important comment: “The pada-text regards manaspāpa as a compound, writing it manaḥ-pāpa. Its separate mention by the Prātiśākhya would seem to indicate that the latter regards the two words as in- dependent; since, as a compound, it would fall under rule 62, and would need no special notice. The accentuation does not help to settle the question, and the sense is nearly as good one way as the other.” One may point out that the commentary of [pseudo-]Sāyaṇa on AV (6.45.1) treats the expressions pāpa and manaḥ as separate vocatives, rather than as parts of a compound, though the manuscripts of the Padapāṭha, without exception, treat this expression as a compound. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मन इति विसर्जनीयस्य पापे परतः सकारो भवति । ‘प॒रोऽपे॑हि मनस्पाप’ (अ.वे. ६.४५.१)। २.३.२१. रायस्पोषादिषु च । Whitney (2.80). I: 21.

346अध्याय २, पाद ३ Translation: Also, [the visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, occurring at the end of the first item is changed to s before the second item] in [sequences] such as rāyaspoṣam. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - राय इति विसर्जनीयस्य पोषादिषु च परतः सकारो भवति । ‘रा॒यस्पोष॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.९.४)। ‘परु॑ष्परुः’ (अ.वे. १.१२.३)। ‘मा पि॑शा॒चं ति॒रस्क॑रः’ (अ.वे. ४.२०.७)। Note: The wording of the commentary creates an impression that the Gaṇa is simply poṣādi. However, it is clear from the cited examples that the entire expression rāyaspoṣādi refers to the Gaṇa. The CAB here cites the first three instances out of a total list of 12 examples found in the APR (203). The examples occur in the same order. Whitney also notes a large number of cases, which he thought were not covered by the earlier rules. Whitney’s listing has several common instances, but several differences. The instances दि॒वस्पु॒त्रौ (AV 8.7.20), दि॒वस्पयः॑ (AV 19.44.5), and द्वि॒ष॒तस्पा॑दयामि (AV 11.1.12, 22) are listed by Whitney, but are not included in the APR (p.121) listing. On the other hand, the APR list includes अ॒सि॒तास्परि॑ (AV 6.137.2), अध॑रः॒ सस्प॑दीष्ट (AV 7.31.1), जा॒स्प॒त्यम् (AV 7.73.10), and स्वा॒दुष्किला॒यम् (AV 18.1.48), which are not listed by Whitney under this rule. However, comparing such lists is a very difficult task, as Whitney notes: “Unfortunately, it is impossible to tell what is the teaching of the Prātiśākhya with regard to any such cases; we do not even know how accu- rately it or its commentators had noticed and noted the instances which their text contained. There is no apparent reason why the single cases noted in rules 66, 72, 77, 78, 79 should not have been left to go into the gaṇa, if a gaṇa was to be established, and neither the accuracy nor the method of the treatise, in dealing with this class of phenomena, is worthy of unqualified condemnation.” Even with the addition of the APR to our understanding of the AV tradition, things have not changed completely. इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः । H, N: ॥८०॥ द्वितीयस्य तृतीयपादः. C, E, F: द्वितीयस्य तृतीयः पादः. A, B, D, J, M, P: तृतीयः पादः. I: इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः. O: च.॥ द्वितीयस्य तृतीयः पादः ॥ ३ ॥ सू.॥ २१ ॥.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका347 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥८०॥ द्वितीयस्य तृतीयपादः ॥ __________________________________

॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ चतुर्थः पादः ॥ २.४.१. अत्र नाम्युपधस्य षकारः । Whitney (2.81). Translation: Here [i.e. in the context of the section beginning with CA (2.3.3: samāse sakāraḥ kapayor …) teaching the change of a visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, to s], s is changed to ṣ, if preceded by a nāmin [i.e. any vowel other than a and ā]. Note: The change of s to ṣ taught by this rule is already apparent in the examples of a number of previous rules, e.g. CA (2.3.4-6; 14-8; 21). Its scope also extends to rules which follow, e.g. CA (2.4.3-6). The commentary CAB continues the words नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारः into these following rules. As Whitney points out, this rule applies “whether the s to which the rules relate is original, or comes from visarjanīya.” In the Prātiśākhyas, this phenomenon is generally referred to by the term nati “bending [= retroflexion],” and the vowels which condition this change are called nāmin “bender [= retroflexing vowel].” Whitney translates the term nāmin as “alterant vowel.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यदेतत् - ‘समासे सकारः कपयो- रनन्त…’ (च.आ. २.३.३) इत्यनुक्रान्तः । अत्र नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । एतान्येवोदाहरणानि । नाम्युपध- स्येत्येवं द्रष्टव्यम् । इत उत्तरं यदनुक्रमिष्यामः । २.४.२. सहेः साड्भूतस्य । Whitney (2.82). C, E, F, I, O: °ड्रूपस्य. B, D, J, N: °द्भूतस्य. Translation: [The s] of the root saḥ, when transformed to sāṭ, [is changed to ṣ]. Note: From the examples given by the commentary, we understand that the condition nāmyupadhasya is not relevant for this rule, and that the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका349 change of s to ṣ takes place, even when the form sāṭ is not preceded by a nāmin vowel, a vowel other than a and ā. If sāḍbhūtasya in the CA rule is intended to prevent the application of this rule to the form prasahanam, and if prasahanam is not attested in Vedic literature, then it is clear that like Pāṇini 8.3.56 (saheḥ sāḍaḥ saḥ), the CA too, consciously or unconsciously, could not dispense with the contemporary lan- guage while framing its rules. Whitney points out, “That sāḍbhūta means ‘when it becomes sāṭ,’ and not ‘when it becomes sāh,’ appears from the instances amitrasāha and sātrāsāha (see under iii.23 = CA 3.1.23), in which, although the vowel of the root is lengthened, the sibilant remains unaltered.” Whitney also objects to the rule itself, and its location in the text: “There is no real necessity for any such rule as this, since all the words to which the commentary regards it as relating have precisely the same form in pada as in saṃhitā.” A positive way of putting the same thing may be to say that this rule, like many others, shows progress of linguistic analysis beyond the stage represented in the Padapāṭha. The rule is a close parallel to Pāṇini 8.3.56 As for its location, Whitney says: “But there is a graver objection to the rule than its dispensability: it is quite out of place where it stands. In the first place, it treats of an initial s, while the treatise otherwise puts off such cases until after all those of a final s are disposed of; and, much worse, it interrupts the anuvr̥tti of nāmyupadhasya, which must necessarily take place from rule 81 (= CA 2.4.1) to those that follow; since, in the majority of the cases which it concerns, the sibilant is preceded by long ā. Either there is here an unusual de- gree of awkwardness and inconsistency of method on the part of the author of the treatise, or the rule is an interpolation.” Since the rule is found in all the manuscripts, and since the CAB comments on it, the chance of this rule being an interpolation is drastically reduced. The question of the location of the rule, however, cannot be easily solved. The problem has been resolved in Pāṇini’s grammar in an interesting way: P.8.3.55 (अपदान्तस्य मूर्धन्यः) states the general conditions: “[in the follow- ing rules], the words ‘of the non-word-final’ and ‘cerebral’ [should be continued].” Then comes the rule P.8.3.56 (सहेः साडः सः): “The s of the root sah, transformed into sāṭ, [is changed to a cerebral ṣ].” Then comes the rule P.8.3.57 (इण्कोः): “after the sounds [included in the shortforms] iṆ and kU.” The term iṆ refers to the sounds i, u, r̥, l̥, e, o, ai, au, h, y, v, r, and l. Among other things, this list includes all the nāmin vowels referred to in CA (2.4.1). The term kU refers to the consonants k, kh, g, gh, and ṅ. Thus, Pāṇini’s system has taken care to place the condition iṇkoḥ after P.8.3.56, and avoid the

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 350 problem of this condition becoming vacuous in this rule. I now doubt the traditional view that the CA follows Pāṇini. A large portion of the CA probably predates Pāṇini, or follows pre-Pāṇinian traditions, and Pāṇini’s formulations seem to improve upon the inadequacies of this or a similar older tradition. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सहेः साड्भूतस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘तु॒रा॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। ‘प्राषाट्’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. २०.३५.२)। ‘श॒त्रू॒षाण्नी॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.११)। ‘अ॒भी॒- षाड॑स्मि विश्वा॒षाट्’ (अ. वे. १२.१.५४)। साड्भूतस्येति किमर्थम् । ‘प्रसहनम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: The examples listed by the CAB are found in APR (p. 146). २.४.३. तद्धिते तकारादौ । Whitney (2.83). Translation: Before a t-initial taddhita affix, [the s, preceded by a vowel other than a and ā, is changed to ṣ]. Note: As Whitney notes, none of the other Prātiśākhyas give “a grammatical definition of the phenomenon, like that of our treatise.” Taddhita affixes are affixes added to nominal stems to derive secondary nominal stems. This rule, unlike the previous rule, has a proper application within the normal scope of a Prātiśākhya. For instance, वपु॑ष्टमे in AV (5.5.6) is represented as vapuḥ-tame in the Padapāṭha. Based on such examples, we know that the author of the AV Padapāṭha did separate certain affixes from their bases, af- fixes which were explicitly called taddhita by Pāṇini and the CA. Compare Pāṇini’s rule P.8.3.101 (ह्रस्वात्तादौ तद्धिते), which has an additional condition hrasvāt “after a short vowel,” to prevent from this change applying after long vowels. The CA version can dispense with such a condition, because it is primarily concerned with examples as they appear in the ŚAV, and not with Sanskrit at large. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तद्धिते परतः तकारादौ नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘सर्पिष्टरम्’ (not in Vedic texts)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका351 ‘यजुष्टरम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘वपुष्टरम्’ (not in AV, ऋ.वे. १०.३२.३)। ‘वपुष्टमाम्’ (‘वपुष्ट॑मे,’ अ.वे. ५.५. ६)। तद्धित इति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒ग्निस्त॒क्मान॒म्’ (अ.वे. ५. २२.१)। तकारादाविति किमर्थम् । ‘सर्पिस्सात्’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘यजुस्सात्’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘वपुस्सात्’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: Most of the unattested examples quoted in the CAB are found in the KV on P.8.3.101 (ह्रस्वात्तादौ तद्धिते). २.४.४. युष्मदादेशे तैस्त्वमादिवर्जम् । Whitney (2.84). Translation: [The s, preceded by a vowel other than a and ā, is changed to an ṣ], before [t-initial] allomorphs [lit. ‘substi- tutes’] of yuṣmat, except in passages such as tais tvam. Note: The relevant allomorphs of yuṣmat in this context are tvam, tvā, and te, as well as tubhyam and tava not included by Whitney. In a footnote, Whitney lists all cases of this phenomenon he found in the text of the ŚAV. However, he does not list the gaṇa, which forms the exceptions: “This gaṇa I have not thought it worth while to take the trouble to fill up, deeming it of more interest to give the complete list of the cases in which the change of the sibilant did, rather than of those in which it did not, take place. The former are, I be- lieve, the more numerous of the two classes.” Methodologically, of course, Whitney’s procedure is exactly opposite of the one chosen by the CA. Also note that the gaṇa referred to in the above CA rule is fully listed in the APR (204). The APR lists a total of 18 instances in this gaṇa, and the CAB cites the first three instances exactly in the same order. The examples listed in this gaṇa also include instances of tubhyam and tava, indicating that our present rule did indeed cover these forms as well. There are other significant differences between the listings of Whitney and the listing given by the APR. Whitney lists अथो॒ यो म॒न्युष्टे॑ (AV 7.74.3) as a positive case of change, while the list of exceptions to this change in the APR (p. 122) includes this example, indicating that the APR knew this instance without cerebralization.

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 352 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - युष्मदादेशे (H, N: युष्मदस्मदादेशे) तकारादौ नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति तैस्त्वमादि- वर्जम् । ‘ब॒हिष्टे॑ अस्तु’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘ऋ॒तुभि॑ष्ट्वा व॒यम्’ (अ.वे. १.३५.४)। ‘द्यौष्ट्वा॑ पि॒ता’ (अ.वे. २.२८. ४)। ‘ताभि॒ष्ट्वम॒स्मान्’ (अ.वे. ९.२.२५)। ‘तैष्टे॒ रोहि॑तः’ (अ.वे. १३.१.३५)। तैस्त्वमादिवर्जमिति किमर्थम् । ‘तैस्त्वं पु॒त्र(म्)’ (अ.वे. ३.२३.४)। ‘वध्रि॒(H: ध्नि, N: कध्रे)स्त्वम्’ (अ.वे. ४.६.८)। ‘प॒वस्तै॑स्त्वा॒’ (अ.वे. ४.७.६)। Note: The manuscripts of the commentary both contain the reading युष्मदस्मदादेशे, where the reference to asmad is clearly an error of some copyist. Also compare P.8.3.103 (युष्मत्तत्ततक्षुःष्वन्तःपादम्). The condition अन्तःपादम् “within a metrical foot” in Pāṇini eliminates certain instances, which the APR (p. 122) had to explicitly list as exceptions, e.g. अद॑ब्धेभिः॒ परि॑ पाह्य॒क्तुभिः॑ । तवे- द्विष्णो, AV (17.1.9). It is, however, not clear how the Pāṇinian system would take care of many of the other examples listed in the APR as exceptions, except through some global rules like बहुलं छन्दसि. २.४.५. तत्तानग्रादिषु । Whitney (2.85) adds च. E, F, I, O, P(corr): °नग्ना°. Translation: [The s, preceded by a vowel other than a and ā, is changed to ṣ] also before tat, tān agre etc. Note: Whitney says that the relevant forms of tat covered by this rule “are tam, tat, and tān.” If tān is thus included by the generic reference to tat, then what is the point of listing ‘tān agre etc’? Normally, such phrasal citations are meant to limit a given generalization to the instances with the whole phrases. If we thus take this reference to तानग्रे as limiting this change to those instances of tān which are followed by agre, then some cases in the AV pose a dilemma, e.g. अ॒ग्निष्टान॒स्मात्, AV (18.2.28). This case is listed by Whitney as a case where the rule applies. The CA, perhaps, knew this case without cerebralization, and that the present text represents an analogical extension of cerebralization. However, since the rule refers to a Gaṇa, which is not fully illustrated by the CAB, we cannot be certain.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका353 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तत्तानग्रादिषु च परतः नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘अ॒ग्निष्टद्धोता॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७१. १)। ‘अ॒ग्निष्टानग्रे॑’ (अ.वे. २.३४.३)। ‘वा॒युष्टानग्रे॑’ (अ.वे. २.३४.४)। ‘दुष्टरो’ (Whitney: नो) (‘दु॒ष्ट॒नो॒,’ अ.वे. ४.७. ३; ‘दु॒ष्टर॑म्,’ अ.वे. ६.४.१)। ‘निष्टं भ॑ज’ (अ.वे. ४.२२. २)। ‘नि॒ष्टक्व॑री(म्)’ (अ.वे. ५.२२.६)। Note: The CAB additionally offers a few examples which do not strictly come under the purview of the present rule. The manuscripts actually read duṣṭaro, while Whitney reports duṣṭano, and then comments: “The word duṣṭara (vi.4.1) would seem to come properly under it, but its treatment by the pada-texts (it is written dustara, not duḥ-tara) indicates, I should think, that the Hindus regarded it as an irregular compound of duḥ and stara, from the root star (str̥); hence it would fall under the next rule, or else under rule 98 (= CA 2.4.18).” The manuscript reading duṣṭaro looks like a conflation of duṣṭano and duṣṭaram. The most likely intended form must be दु॒ष्ट॒नो॒ (AV 4.7.3), which is split by the Padapāṭha as दु॒स्त॒नो॒ इति॑ दुःऽतनो. २.४.६. स्तृतस्वस्वपिषु । Whitney (2.86). I have accepted Whitney’s reading against all the mss, because each manuscript contains numerous errors. H, Nb: स्तृतः स्व°. A, B, D, E, F, O: स्तृतस्य स्वपिषु. Na: स्तृतिः स्व°. I: स्तृतस्त्यस्वपिषु. C: स्त्रितः स्वस्वपिषु. J, M: स्त्रितस्त्वस्वपिषु. P: स्त्रितस्यस्वपिषु. Translation: Before str̥ta, sva, and forms of the root svap, [the s, preceded by a vowel other than a or ā, is changed to ṣ]. Note: The manuscripts of the CA, and also of the AV, do not reflect the predicted double sibilant in these forms, but the forms are read with a single cerebral ṣ. The printed editions follow the manuscripts in this respect. However, in the examples, as intended by the rule and the commentary, one must assume that, after a final s has been changed to ṣ, by this rule, before one of these forms, the initial s of these forms further undergoes cerebraliza- tion. Whitney here notices a gap in the coverage of sandhi rules in the CA. He points out that the rule as literally interpreted would yield the ‘barbarous and impossible forms’ like aniṣstr̥taḥ, niṣsvā, and duṣsvapnyam, and that there is

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 354 no express prescription to change the s of the roots to ṣ due to its conjunction with an ṣ. Pāṇini 8.4.41 (ṣṭunā ṣṭuḥ) expressly takes care of such a situation. However, as Whitney correctly states: “… we are compelled to look upon aniṣṣṭr̥taḥ, niṣṣvā, and duṣṣvapnyam as the forms which the Prātiśākhya in- tends to sanction.” Also, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 370) remarks: “The proper readings in (AV 6.121.1) c are (see note to Prāt. ii.86 = CA 2.4.6) duṣṣvápnyam and níṣṣva, which the mss. almost without exception abbreviate to duṣvap- and níṣva, just as they abbreviate dattvā to datvā, or, in 2 a, rájjvām to rájvām. SPP. here gives in his saṃhitā-text ní ṣva, with all his authorities; our text has níḥ ṣva, with only one of ours (O.): doubtless the true metrical form is níṣ ṣuvā ’smát.” In AV (7.82.3) etc., the CA rule enjoins double ṣṣ, which is not seen in any mss. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) says that the mss. drop the ṣ according to the APR 80. Surya Kanta argues that the mss. thus represent a non-Śaunakīya tradition. However, it may be that even the Śaunakīyas disregarded their own precepts, when it came to writing down the text of their tradition, under the pressure of the contemporary practice of writing Sanskrit, where the writing of such double ṣṣ is hardly ever practiced. Thus, one needs to make a distinction between the original Śaunakīya precepts, and what later happened to the transmitted text under the pressure of the latter- day practice of Sanskrit orthography, and perhaps, pronunciation. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्तृतस्वस्वपिषु परतः नाम्युपधस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘अग्निष्ष्टृतः’ (?, Whitney: ‘अनि॑ष्टृतः,’ अ.वे. ७.८२.३)। ‘दु॒ष्ष्वप्न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.४६. ३)। ‘दुरि॒तं निष्ष्वा॒स्मत्’ (अ.वे. ६.१२१.१; ७.८३.४)। Note: Referring to aniḥ-str̥taḥ in AV (7.82.3), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 449) remarks: “All the pada-mss. read at the end ániḥ-str̥taḥ, and this is required by Prāt. ii.86 (= CA 2.4.6); but SPP. alters to áni-str̥taḥ – which, to be sure, better suits the sense. The RV. pada-text also has (viii.33.9) ániḥ- str̥taḥ; TS. (and by inference MS., as the editor reports nothing), ániṣṭr̥taḥ, un- changed.” २.४.७. नामिकरेफात्प्रत्ययसकारस्य । Whitney (2.87). A, B, D, P: split the rule after °प्रत्ययः. H, J, M, N, O: °प्रत्ययः सकारस्य. P(orig): हकारस्य for सकारस्य.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका355 Translation: The [initial] s of a suffix [is changed to ṣ] after a vowel other than a and ā, k, or r. Note: There is a shift beginning with this rule to the change of an initial s. The conditioning sounds belong to a different morpheme, and hence we should note that the change takes place across a morpheme-boundary. Ele- ments across such morpheme-boundaries are occasionally split by the Pada- pāṭha, but not always so. In all the three examples cited here, the Padapāṭha does not split the constituents. The comparable rules in Pāṇini are P.8.3.57 (इण्कोः) and P.8.3.59 (आदेशप्रत्यययोः). While the present CA rule refers to k, rather than ka-varga, cf. Pāṇini’s kU in P.8.3.57, the CAB renders it as kavarga, possibly under the in- fluence of the Pāṇinian rules. Or perhaps, as Whitney suggests: “He explains ka in the rule by kavargāt, ‘after a guttural,’ probably in view of the require- ments of some authorities (see under ii. 6 = CA 2.1.6) that the k should be- come kh before the sibilant.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नामिनश्च कवर्गाच्च रेफाच्चोत्तरस्य प्रत्ययसकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘फाला॑ज्जा॒तः क॑रिष्यति’ (अ.वे. १०.६.२)। ‘इय॑क्षमाणा॒ भृगु॑भिः’ (अ.वे. ४.१४. ५)। ‘ह॒विषाहा॑र्षमेनम्’ (अ.वे. ३.११.३)। Note: Rules such as this one indicate that a transition from the origi- nal purposes of the Prātiśākhya and Śikṣā literature to those of a general grammar of Sanskrit has already begun. This rule deals with a kind of juncture which is not separated even in the Padapāṭha, and hence one would not be ex- pected to make this sandhi in the process of combining the Padas to derive the Saṃhitāpāṭha. This juncture is purely internal. २.४.८. स्त्रैषूयम् । Whitney (2.88). Translation: [The change of s to ṣ also takes place in the form] straiṣūyam [< strai+sūyam]. Note: Whitney comments: “Why, among the words mentioned in iv.83 (= CA 4.3.11), it should be singled out to be made thus the subject of a

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 356 special rule, is not at all clear. The position of the rule, too, thrust in between the two closely related rules 87 (= CA 2.4.7) and 89 (= CA 2.4.9), and dis- turbing their connection, is in a high degree awkward, and calculated to inspire suspicion of an interpolation.” Since all the manuscripts contain this rule in this very position, this rule must have been a very ancient interpolation, if in- deed it is an interpolation. In any case, the instance accounted for in this rule is of an exceptional character. It is not covered by प्रत्ययसकारस्य in CA (2.4.7), because the s of sūya does not belong to an affix. Similarly, it is not covered by rules like CA (2.4.10), because sūyam is not preceded by an upasarga. This form would probably be derived by P.8.3.106 (पूर्वपदात्), which is a nebulous rule saying that, according to some teachers, in Vedic texts, an s, preceded by an appropri- ate conditioning sound belonging to the preceding word, is cerebralized. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्त्रैषूयमिति सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘स्त्रैषू॑यम॒न्यत्र॒’ (अ.वे. ६.११.३)। २.४.९. नलोपेऽपि । Whitney (2.89). Translation: Even when the [intervening] n has been deleted, [the initial s of an affix, preceded by an appropriate conditioning sound, cf. CA (2.4.7), is changed to cerebral ṣ]. Note: As Whitney notes, the rule “is intended to apply to such cases as yajũṣi, havī̃ṣi, where, by ii. 34 (= CA 2.1.34), there has been a loss of n be- fore the ending si, accompanied, by i.67 (= CA 1.3.5), with nasalization of the preceding vowel, when the ending itself is converted into ṣi after the alterant vowel, although the latter is nasal.” It is to be contrasted to Pāṇini 8.3.58 (नुम्विसर्जनीयशर्व्यवायेऽपि). P.8.3.58, in part, says that the s of the following affix changes to ṣ, if preceded by an appropriate conditioning sound, in spite of the intervention of sounds like nUM (> anusvāra). Since the anusvāra is consid- ered to be a consonantal nasal sound, Pāṇini thinks of its intervention in exam- ples like yajūṃṣi. For the CA, which does not have the conception of an anusvāra, the n is deleted, and the preceding vowel is nasalized. Therefore, it speaks of “even after the deletion of the intervening n.” Another point brought up this rule is the conception of the deletion as held by the CA. One may pos- sibly infer that, according to the CA, a deletion may be considered to be like a

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका357 positive zero, whose intervention may block the operation of a rule like CA (2.4.7). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नकारस्यापि लोपे नामिनश्चोत्तरस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘परूं॑षि॒ यस्य॑ सम्भा॒राः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.१)। ‘यज्॑ाूंषि॒ होत्रा॑ ब्रूमः’ (अ.वे. ११.६.१४)। ‘अ॒त्तो ह॒वीँषि॑’ (अ.वे. १८.३.४४)। Note: On this rule, Whitney says: “This rule attaches itself immedi- ately and closely to rule 87 (= CA 2.4.7), from which it has been blunderingly separated by the intrusion of rule 88 (= CA 2.4.8).” On the basis of the con- tents of the rule, one feels like agreeing with Whitney. Note that the parallel rules in Pāṇini, i.e. P.8.3.57 (इण्कोः), P.8.3.58 (नुम्विसर्जनीयशर्व्यवायेऽपि), and P.8.3.59 (आदेशप्रत्यययोः), are consecutive rules. However, rule CA (2.4.8) must have been a very early intrusion, since it is uniformly supported by all the manuscripts as well as by the oldest commentary, i.e. the CAB. २.४.१०. उपसर्गाद्धातोः । Whitney (2.90). A, B, D: °र्ग्रा°. !: 10. Translation: After [an appropriate conditioning sound, cf. CA (2.4.7), at the end of a] preverb (= upasarga), [the initial s] of a verb root [is changed to ṣ]. Note: We should note that, in this case, the Padapāṭha clearly analy- ses the forms pariṣasvajānāḥ and viṣitam into pari-sasvajānāḥ and vi-sitam. The first occurrence of the reduplication of the root in sa+svaj is treated here as representing the root. Here, the counter-examples are fabricated examples, but, as noted by Whitney, “The proper exceptions to the rule are detailed below, in rules 102-107 (= CA 2.4.22-27).” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्गस्थान्निमित्तात् धातुसकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘वृ॒क्षं यद्गावः॑ परिषस्वजा॒ना अ॑नुस्फु॒रम्’ (अ.वे. १.२.३)। ‘विषि॑तं ते वस्तिबि॒लम्’ (अ.वे. १.३.

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 358 ८)। उपसर्गादिति किमर्थम् । ‘दधि सिञ्चति’ । ‘मधु सिञ्चति’ । Note: The counter examples दधि सिञ्चति and मधु सिञ्चति are found in the KV on P. 8.3.65 (उपसर्गात्सुनोतिसुवतिस्यतिस्तौतिस्तोभतिस्थासेनयसेधसिचसञ्जस्व- ञ्जाम्). २.४.११. अभ्यासाच्च । Whitney (2.91). No such rule in A and B. Translation: [The initial s of a verb-root is changed to ṣ] after [an appropriate conditioning sound, cf. CA (2.4.7), in] the reduplication. Note: For all the examples cited by the commentator, the Padapāṭha offers the dental s unchanged, e.g. suṣūdata : susūdata, siṣyade : sisyade. It is not, however, clear how one would avoid double retroflexion in a case like अभि सिष्यदे, AV (5.5.9). Why would rule CA (2.4.10) not apply to this example to change the s of the reduplication to ṣ, as it does in the form परिषस्वजानाः? The answer may lie in the way the Padapāṭha treats these forms. The form परिषस्व- जानाः in AV (1.2.3) is represented as pari-sasvajānāḥ in the Padapāṭha, indicat- ing this as a case of compounding. On the other hand, अभि सिष्यदे in AV (5.5.9) is represented as abhi / sisyade in the Padapāṭha, indicating that these are treated as two separate padas, and hence abhi is not an upasarga. In this context, abhi is a preposition (karmapravacanīya) connected with the accusa- tive vr̥kṣān. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभ्यासाच्चोत्तरस्य धातुसकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘सु॒षदत॑’ (अ.वे. १.२६.४)। ‘अ॒भि सि॑ष्यदे’ (अ.वे. ५.५.९)। ‘आ सुष्वदे’ (only in N, not found in Vedic texts)। ‘आ सु॒ष्वय॑न्ती’ (अ.वे. ५.१२.६; ५.२७.८)। ‘तत्सि॑षासति’ (अ.वे. १३.२.१४)। ‘सु॒षु॒वे’ (अ.वे. १४.१.४३)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका359 २.४.१२. स्थासहिसिचीनामकारव्यवायेऽपि । Whitney (2.92). E, F, I, O: °व्यवधायेपि. No such rule in A and B. E (corr), F (corr), Ha: °नामकारस्य व्य°. O: स्थासहितसिची°. Translation: [The s of the roots] sthā, sah, and sic, [is changed to ṣ after an appropriate conditioning sound, cf. CA (2.4.7), in the upasarga], even when there is an intervening [past-tense marker] a. Note: There is an interesting theoretical issue concerning the applica- tion of this rule which has not been brought out either by the CAB or by Whitney. For example, in the example abhyaṣṭhām, the components are abhi+a+sthām. On the face of it, the rule assumes that the change of s to ṣ takes place before the i of abhi is changed to y. CA (2.4.7: नामिकरे- फात्प्रत्ययसकारस्य) does not include the sound y among the conditioning sounds for this change, while the category of nāmin includes the sound i. On the other hand, the conditioning sounds for this change, as listed in P.8.3.57 (इण्कोः), in- clude y, besides i, in the abbreviation iṆ, cf. Padamañjarī on P.8.3.63 (प्राक् सि- तादड्व्यवायेऽपि) says: अभ्यषुणोदिति । … प्रागेव यणादेशात्षत्वम्, कृते वा यणि यकारमे- वाश्रित्य षत्वम्. Thus, Pāṇini can afford to make the change of s to ṣ, either be- fore or after changing abhi to abhy. On the other hand, the CA seems to expect us to make change of s to ṣ, before changing abhi to abhy. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्थासहिसिचीत्येतेषाम् अकारव्यवायेऽ- पि उपसर्गस्थान्निमित्तात् सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘अ॒भ्य॑- ष्ठां॒ विश्वाः॑’ (अ.वे. १०.५.३६; १६.९.१)। ‘तेन॑ दे॒वा व्य॑- षहन्त’ (अ.वे. ३.१०.१२)। ‘येना॒क्षा अ॒भ्यषि॑च्यन्त’ (अ.वे. १४.१.३६)। Note: The manuscript H presents the first sentence simply as: स्थासहिसिचीनामकारस्य षकारो भवति । Whitney rightly felt that this was mutilated and incomplete, and he restored the sentence as: स्थासहिसिचीनामुपसर्गस्थान्निमित्ता- दकारव्यवायेऽपि धातुसकारस्य षकारो भवति। While this is not exactly identical with the text as now found in the second manuscript, N, it is very close to it, and we must admire Whitney’s acumen in restoring the missing text. For the examples cited by the commentary, the Padapāṭha and the printed editions offer different treatment. The example abhyaṣṭhām in AV

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 360 (10.5.36) is represented in the Padapāṭha as two words: abhi / asthām. The VVRI edition reads vyasahanta in AV (3.10.12), while it notes the manuscript variant vyaṣahanta. The Padapāṭha splits it as: vi / asahanta. The form abhyaṣicyanta in AV (14.1.36) is represented in the Padapāṭha as: abhi- asicyanta. All the three forms are given with cerebrals in the Whitney-Roth edition. २.४.१३. अभ्यासव्यवायेऽपि स्थः । Whitney (2.93). Translation: Even with the intervention of a reduplication, [the s] of sthā [is changed to ṣ, after an appropriate conditioning sound, cf. CA (2.4.7), in the preverb (upasarga)]. Note: In the examples cited by the commentary, the Padapāṭha restores the ‘original’ dental sibilant, e.g. vi taṣṭhire : vi / tasthire. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभ्यासव्यवायेऽपि उपसर्गस्थान्निमित्तात् स्थः सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘स॒प्त सिन्ध॑वो वि तष्ठि॒रे’ (अ.वे. ४.६.२)। ‘ब्रह्म॑ पुरु॒रूपं॒ वि त॑ष्ठे(H: ष्ठिरे)’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.१९)। Note: Whitney’s text for AV (9.10.19) does not show the application of this rule, but reads: vi tasthe. Whitney says that this was given erroneously and that there is manuscript evidence to support the reading vi taṣṭhe. This reading is also supported by the VVRI edition, AV (9.15.19 = W: 9.10.19). Whitney further points out: “We have in two other passages (ix.9.2, xiv.2.9) adhi tasthuḥ (not taṣṭhuḥ); this apparently constitutes an exception to the rule which has escaped the notice both of the treatise and of the commenta- tor : possibly, however, the adhi is not in these passages regarded as standing in the relation of upasarga to the root sthā, since it does, in fact, belong rather, in a prepositional relation, to preceding ablative cases, than to the verbal form as its prefix : and this is the more clearly indicated by its retaining its independ- ent accent before the accented verb.” The VVRI edition agrees with Whitney’s reading, and cites no manuscript variants. It is just not clear what ablative cases Whitney is referring to in the cited examples. The preposition (कर्मप्रवच- नीय) adhi in both instances seems to echo the locatives in the context: यत्रे॒मा

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका361 विश्वा॒ भुव॒नाधि॑ त॒स्थुः, AV (9.9.2); ये ग॑न्ध॒र्वा अ॑प्स॒रस॑श्च दे॒वीरे॒षु वा॑नस्प॒त्येषु॒ येऽधि॑ त॒स्थुः, AV (14.2.9). २.४.१४. परमेभ्योऽनापाके । Whitney (2.94). P: °नापाने. Translation: [The initial s of sthā is changed to ṣ] after parama etc., but not after āpāke. Note: The CAB does not explicitly continue the word sthaḥ from the previous rule, though all the examples it cites are examples of the root sthā, and it makes eminent sense to continue the word into this rule. It may be noted that all the examples of the paramādi gaṇa listed under APR (205, pp. 122-3) in- volve the element stha. There are two instances included here which actually involve the superlative affix -iṣṭha, but seem to have been evidently wrongly etymologized as involving stha, i.e. śreṣṭha and prathiṣṭha. These two words are not analyzed by the Padapāṭha. However, in all the examples cited by the CAB, the Padapāṭha analyses the components, and reduces the ṣ to s, e.g. parameṣṭhī : parame-sthī. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परमादिभ्यः पूर्वपदेभ्यः अनापाके उत्त- रपदस्थस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘प॒र॒मे॒ष्ठी’ (अ.वे. ४. ११.७)। ‘भु॒व॒ने॒ष्ठाः’ (अ.वे. २.१.४)। ‘म॒ध्य॒मे॒ष्ठाः’ (अ.वे. २.६. ४)। ‘अ॒ङ्गे॒ष्ठाः’ (अ.वे. ६.१४.१)। अनापाक इति किमर्थम् । ‘आ॒पा॒के॒स्थाः प्र॑हा॒सिनः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१४)। Note: The gaṇa referred to in this CA rule is fully listed in the APR (205). It contains a total of 9 instances, of which the CAB lists the first three instances in the same order. One should also note an interesting fact that the CA rule contains the exception: अनापाके, which allows the exclusion of the ex- ample आ॒पा॒के॒स्थाः प्र॑हा॒सिनः॑. The APR (200), on the other hand, does not contain any such explicit statement of exception, but perhaps excludes the above exam- ple simply by not listing it. However, one must say that rule APR (200: अनुपसर्गात्षकारः) would apply in this case, and one should have had a list of ex- ceptions. One may possibly make a guess that the original CA notion of such gaṇas was more like the notion of ākr̥tigaṇas in the Pāṇinian system, and there- fore, one needed exceptions like अनापाके included. Once full listings of gaṇas

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 362 were made, the need for stating such exceptions diminished. One needs ex- ceptions stated, only when one does not have full lists of instances, and has only generic rules. The examples bhuvaneṣṭhāḥ, madhyameṣṭhāḥ, and aṅge- ṣṭhāḥ occur in the same order as examples 114-116 under APR (79). The VVRI edition, which is basically a reprint of the SSP edition, reads AV (8.6.14): आ॒पा॒के॒ष्ठाः प्र॑हा॒सिनः॑, while it lists the reading approved by the CA, आ॒पा॒के॒स्थाः प्र॑हा॒सिनः॑, as a manuscript variant. Most likely this is a case of the spread of retroflexion to examples where it did not occur in an earlier period. Whitney’s reading matches what is approved by the CA, but one cannot be certain whether he was influenced by the CA in the choice of his reading. Criticizing SSP., Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 496) says: “In (AV 8.6.14)c, he (= SSP.) adopts āpākeṣṭhā́s, with a small minority of his mss., and directly against Prāt. ii.94 (= 2.4.14), which prescribes -sthā́s.” २.४.१५. अपसव्याभ्यां च । Whitney (2.95). Translation: Also after apa and savya, [the s of sthā is changed to ṣ]. Note: As Whitney notes, in these cases “the change takes place ir- regularly after a, instead of after an alterant vowel.” The Padapāṭha does not analyze the components of apāṣṭhāt, AV (4.6.5), and does not reduce the cere- bral sibilant to dental, but it does analyze savyaṣṭhāḥ, AV (8.8.23) into savya- sthāḥ. Pāṇini 8.3.97 (अम्बाम्बगोभूमिसव्यापद्वित्रिकुशेकुशङ्क्वङ्गुमञ्जिपुञ्जिपरमेबर्हिर्दि- व्यग्निभ्यः स्थः) lumps apa and savya along with parame, and several others. This rule allows the formations ambaṣṭha and āmbaṣṭha which also lack phonologi- cal motivation for this change. Pāṇini also has a special rule to account for an equally exceptional praṣṭha, cf. P.8.3.92 (प्रष्ठोऽग्रगामिनि). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य

अप सव्य इत्येताभ्यां चोत्तरस्थसकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘अ॒पा॒ष्ठाच्छृङ्गा॑त्’ (अ.वे. ४.६.५)। ‘इन्द्रः॑ सव्य॒ष्ठाश्च॒न्द्रमाः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.८.२३)। Note: On apāṣṭhāt in AV (4.6.5), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 154) says: “Prāt. ii.95 (= CA 2.4.15) regards apāṣṭha as from apa-sthā, doubtless correctly”.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका363 २.४.१६. अग्नेः स्तोमसोमयोः । Whitney (2.96). A, B, D, E, Ha, J, M, Na, P: अग्नेस्तो°. F, O: अग्ने- स्तोमयोः. Translation: [The s] of stoma and soma [is changed to ṣ] after agni. Note: These cases are covered by a closely similar rule in Pāṇini: P.8.3.82 (अग्नेः स्तुत्स्तोमसोमाः). However, while the form agniṣṭomena, AV (9.6. 40), is reduced in the Padapāṭha to agni-stomena, the form agnīṣomau, AV (8. 9.14) is not so analyzed. Whitney also points out agniṣvāttaḥ, AV (18.3.44: Pada: agni-svāttaḥ), which he says should have been included in this rule: “We can hardly suppose that it was intentionally omitted here, to be included in the gaṇa of rule 98 [= CA 2.4.18], below: either it must have been overlooked by the maker of the treatise, or the verse which contains it was not in his Atharvaveda : that it was, however, contained in the text recognized by the commentator, is shown by the fact that he several times (under i.80 = CA 1.3.18; i.84 = CA 1.3.22; and ii.34 = CA 2.1.34) cites the phrase atto havīṃṣi, which forms part of its second line.” Whitney’s inference may not be so cogent, especially because the par- allel rule in Pāṇini, i.e. P.8.3.82, also excludes the consideration of this form. Secondly, the APR (206, pp. 123-4) precisely does what Whitney considers to be most unlikely, namely it lists this example among a gaṇa, which begins with tri, the gaṇa which is referred to in CA (2.4.18). One may assume that the CA also intended this example to be included in this gaṇa. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अग्नेरुत्तरयोः स्तोमसोमयोः सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘याव॑दग्निष्टो॒मेन॑’ (अ.वे. ९.६.४०)। ‘अ॒ग्नीषोमा॑वदधुः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.१४)। अग्नेरिति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒भि सोमो॑ अवीवृधत्’ (अ.वे. १.२९.३)। २.४.१७. सुञः । Whitney (2.97). A, B: सुपः. Translation: [The s] of the particle su [is also changed to ṣ after an appropriate conditioning sound in the preceding word].

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 364 Note: Pāṇini 8.3.107 (सुञः) is identical with CA (2.4.17). Pāṇini’s rule 8.3.107 comes immediately after P.8.3.106 (पूर्वपदात्), which says that a change like the one taught by the present rule takes place after the conditioning sound in a preceding word, i.e. पूर्वपदात्. This is also made explicit in APR (206: पूर्वपदात् षकारः), which precedes APR (207a) which deals with the exam- ples covered by the present rule. All the examples offered by the CAB are found listed in the same order under APR (207a, p. 124). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सुञः सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘इ॒दम षु’ (अ.वे. १.२४.४)। ‘तदू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.१.५)। ‘पर्यू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.६.४)। ‘म॒हीमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ७.६.२)। ‘अ॒न्य ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१६)। ‘स्तु॒ष ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३७)। ‘त्यमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ७.८५.१)। Note: Whitney misses the example पर्यू षु which is found in both the manuscripts. On anya ū ṣu (AV 18.1.16), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 819) remarks: “RV. x.10.14 has for a the much better version anyám ū ṣú tváṃ. … Our D., and a single ms. of SPP’s (with the comm.), also have anyam ∀at the beginning#, and SPP. accordingly admits anyám into his text, in spite of the absence of tvám. But the comment on the Prāt. three times (under ii.97 = CA 2.4.17; iii.4 = CA 3.1.4; vi.98 = CA 4.3.27) reads anya ū ṣu, and it cannot well be questioned that this is the true text of our AV.” २.४.१८. त्र्यादिभ्यः । Whitney (2.98). A, Hac, Nc: त्रा°. P: आदिभ्यः corrected to त्र्यादिभ्यः. Translation: [The initial s of a word] preceded by words such as tri [is changed to ṣ]. Note: The examples cited by the commentary to illustrate this rule are analyzed by the Padapāṭha into their components and are presented with their original form without the cerebral sibilant, e.g. triṣaptāḥ : tri-saptāḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - त्र्यादिभ्यः पूर्वपदेभ्यः उत्तरपदस्थस्य सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘ये त्रि॑ष॒प्ताः’ (अ.वे. १.१.१)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका365 ‘गो॒षे॒धाम्’ (अ.वे. १.१८.४)। ‘रघु॒ष्यदोऽधि॑’ (अ.वे. ३.७. १)। Note: Referring to the expression tryādi, Whitney says: “Here is an- other of those convenient gaṇas, set as a catch-all for whatever cases may not have been otherwise provided for, and rendering it impossible for us to ascer- tain the precise degree of accuracy with which the authors of the treatise ex- amined and excerpted their text.” Now, the gaṇa referred to in this CA rule is fully listed in APR (206). It contains a total of 16 instances, out of which the CAB quotes the first three instances exactly in the same order. Also see the Note under CA 2.4.16. Whitney further says: “He (= commentator) also, in his paraphrase, limits the application of the rule to cases of this character, in which an alterant vowel at the end of the first member of a compound comes before an initial s of the following member.” The commentator simply says त्र्यादिभ्यः पूर्वपदेभ्यः, and makes no explicit reference to the nāmin vowels at the end of these words. It is, true, however, that all the cited examples fit Whitney’s description. But the examples listed in this gaṇa under APR (206, pp. 123-4) are not examples of compounds. They contain a number of phrasal sequences, e.g. नि ष ही॑यताम्, AV (8.4.10). Whitney offers a number of cases which might potentially become members of this class. Whitney’s listing overlaps with the listing of this gaṇa, as found under APR (206, pp. 123-4). As noted above, the gaṇa under APR (206) contains several phrasal sequences, while Whitney’s listing includes only compound expressions. The APR gaṇa contains the following compound expressions, not covered by Whitney’s listing: gaviṣṭhiram (4.29.5), viṣāsahiḥ (1.29.6), abhimātiṣāhaḥ (4.32.4), and agniṣvāttāḥ (18.3.44). It additionally contains the phrasal sequences ni ṣa hīyatām (8.4.10) and hi ṣmā (18.1.33). On the other hand, Whitney lists the following compounds, which are not listed under APR (206): suṣṭuti (6.1.3), suṣūman (7.46.2), anuṣṭup (8.9.14), triṣṭup (8.9.14), traiṣṭubha (9.10.1), and diviṣṭambhaḥ (19.32.7). २.४.१९. ऋकारान्तात्सदेः । Whitney (2.99). Translation: After a word ending in short r̥, [the initial s] of the root sad [is changed to ṣ].

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 366 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऋकारान्तादुत्तरस्य सदिसकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘हो॒तृ॒षद॑नम्’ (अ.वे. ७.९९.१)। ‘पि॒तृ॒- षद॑नाः पितृ॒षद॑ने त्वा’ (अ.वे. १८.४.६७)। Note: Whitney adds: “To these may be added pitr̥ṣad (xiv.2.33 : p. pitr̥-sad); and in nārṣada (4.19.2 : p. nārsada) is also implied nr̥ṣad.” २.४.२०. बर्हिपथ्यप्सुदिविपृथिवीति च । Whitney (2.100). F: °प्सुदिवीति च. I: °पृथिवीभ्यश्च. J, M, P(corr): °पथाप्सु°. I: 20. Translation: [The s of the root sad is changed to ṣ] also after barhi, pathi, apsu, divi, and pr̥thivi. Note: Whitney comments: “We have reason to be surprised that the root sad is treated in this manner, being made the subject of these two separate rules. If the compounds into which it enters as final member are to be excepted from the general gaṇa of rule 98 (= CA 2.4.18), we should expect to find it directed that the s of sad should always be lingualized after an alterant vowel, as is actually the case. Not only is there, by the method adopted, a loss of that brevity which treatises of the sūtra class are wont to aim at almost as their chief object, but there is also a loss of completeness : the only remaining compound of sad of this class, suṣad (e.g. ii.36.4), is left out, to be provided for in the general gaṇa. Or is it possible that su is regarded as falling under rule 90 (= CA 2.4.10), as if a proper upasarga or preposition? If so, the forms into which it enters would be sufficiently provided for; since, excepting in the cases noted in the later rule (102 = CA 2.4.22 etc.), it always lingualizes the initial s of a root, while it has no effect upon that of a preposition or adverb, as in susaha (vi.64.3 : p. su-saha) and the numerous compounds in which it is followed by sam, as susaṃrabdha.” There is no exactly parallel rule or rules in Pāṇini which deals specifically with the formations involving the root sad. We may note that no forms of sad are noted in the gaṇa under APR (206), which is probably the same gaṇa as referred to by the term tryādi in CA (2.4.18). Whitney’s discussion regarding the status of su needs an extensive consideration. For a parallel discussion, see the KV on P.8.3.88 (सुविनिर्दुर्भ्यः) and P.8.3.98 (सुषामादिषु च).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका367 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - बर्हि पथि अप्सु दिवि पृथिवीत्येतेभ्य- श्चोत्तरस्य सदिसकारस्य षकारो भवति । बर्हि । ‘बर्हि

॑षदः पितरः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.५१)। बर्हि । पथि । ‘प॒थि॒षदी॑ नृ॒चक्ष॑सा’ (अ.वे. १८.२.१२)। पथ्यप्सु । ‘अ॒प्सु॒षदोऽप्य॒ग्नीन्’ (अ.वे. १२.२.४)। अप्सु । दिवि । ‘ये देवा दि॒वि॒षदः॑’ (अ.वे. १०.९.१२)। दिवि । पृथिवि । ‘पृ॒थि॒वि॒षद्भ्यः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.४.७८)। २.४.२१. हिदिविभ्यामस्तेः । Whitney (2.101). Translation: After hi and divi, [the initial s] of the verb as [is changed to ṣ]. Note: It is understood from the context that the rule applies only to those forms of the verb as, where the initial a is deleted, and the forms become s-initial. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - हि दिवि इत्येताभ्यामुत्तरस्य अस्ति- सकारस्य षकारो भवति । ‘आपो॒ हि ष्ठा’ (अ.वे. १.५. १)। ‘ये दे॑वा दि॒वि ष्ठ’ (अ.वे. १.३०.३)। ततोऽपवदति । ‘वि॒मुचो॒ हि सन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. ६.११२.३)। Note: What is the source of this exception referred to in the passage ततोऽपवदति । वि॒मुचो॒ हि सन्ति॑ in the CAB? APR? This could be a case of the author of the CA inadvertently forgetting to mention an exception, or a case of textual change. In this case, the manuscripts of the AV do follow this excep- tion, and Whitney as well as the VVRI edition read वि॒मुचो॒ हि सन्ति॑. One, how- ever, cannot be certain that this was the reading known to the CA. Referring to the preceding section, Whitney makes the following gen- eral comments: “But there are still left in the Atharvan text a few instances of the same conversion, which can hardly be regarded as included in any of the preceding rules, since they are analogous with none of the other cases there treated of: unless something has been lost from this final section of the chapter

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 368

of which there are no indications - the treatise-makers and their commentator must lie under the imputation of having been careless enough to overlook them. The passages referred to are as follows: आदु॑ ष्टे॒नम् (iv.3.4), तमु॑ ष्टुहि॒ (vi.1.2), नि ष ही॑यताम् (viii.4.10), and चि॒द्धि ष्मा॑ (xviii.1.33). There would be little plausibil- ity in a claim that the verses containing these passages were not included in the Atharvaveda accepted by the school to which the treatise belonged, or that the readings of the school were different.” Now we find that the last two of the examples are mentioned in the tryādi gaṇa, which is referred to in CA (2.4.18), and is extensively listed under APR (206, pp. 123-4). Besides this, Whitney’s assumption that the CAB was expected to give complete lists of all examples and counter-examples found in the text of the ŚAV is baseless. Even in the APR, it appears that lists of posi- tive examples are not complete catalogues, while the lists of exceptions are so. In contrast, the CAB is almost always illustrative, rather than exhaustive. २.४.२२. न सृपिसृजिस्पृशिस्फूर्जिस्वरतिस्मरतीनाम् । Whitney (2.102). Ha, Na: °स्पृषि°. J, M: °स्यूर्जि°. E (corr): °मृशि° for °स्पृशि°. F (corr): omits सृजि. Translation: Not, [however, the s] of the roots sr̥p, sr̥j, spr̥ś, sphūrj, svr̥, and smr̥. Note: Whitney makes the following comment: “This is evidently a rule of kindred sphere with rule 106 (= CA 2.4.26), below, and the two might well enough have been combined into one, which should teach that a root con- taining a r, either semivowel or vowel, was not liable to the changes prescribed in this section.” However, from the behavior of the treatise, one may infer that the CA does not intend to cover the consonantal and the vocalic r under a common generalization. This suspicion is further strengthened by the separate mention of r̥ and r in one and the same rule, e.g. CA (3.4.1: ऋवर्णरेफषकारेभ्यः समानपदे नो णः). Pāṇini 8.3.110 (न रपरसृपिसृजिस्पृशिसवनादीनाम्) also separately refers to roots containing consonantal and vocalic r. Whitney further says: “As so stated, it would require the notice of but a single exception, vi ṣphurat (vi.56.1 and x.4.8). As the rules now stand, they are slightly inexact, for in neither of them are included anusphuram (i.2.3), atisara (v.8.2 etc.), and pratisara (e.g. ii.11.2), although other forms of the root sar are contemplated in rule 106 (= CA 2.4.26).” Again, we now find that the instances of atisara (v.8.2 etc.), and prati- sara (e.g. ii.11.2) are listed in the gosanyādi gaṇa referred to in the next rule,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका369 CA (2.4.23), and fully listed under APR (147f, p. 101). As for anusphuram (1.2.3) mentioned by Whitney as an exception to cerebralization, the VVRI edition notes several manuscripts which have the reading anuṣphuram. Fur- ther, the absence of anusphuram in the gosanyādi gaṇa listed exhaustively under APR (147f, p. 101) may be taken as an indication that the APR also knew the form as anuṣphuram, rather than as anusphuram. On the other hand, P.8.3.76 (स्फुरतिस्फुलत्योर्निर्निविभ्यः) says that after nir, ni, and vi, the s of sphurati and sphulati is optionally (or ‘preferably’ a la Kiparsky) changed to ṣ. The tra- dition understands this rule in such a way, that without this rule, there would be no cerebral ṣ in any forms of these roots: एतयोरपि पूर्ववदप्राप्त एव मूर्धन्यो विधीयते, Nyāsa on KV on P.8.3.76. This would predict the form anusphuram. One could conceivably argue that a more original AV form anuṣphuram was reduced to anusphuram under the pressure of the Pāṇinian tradition. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न तु खलु सृपिसृजिस्पृशिस्फूर्जिस्वर- तिस्मरतीनाम् इत्येतेषां सकारस्य षकारो भवति । सृपि । ‘विसृपो विरप्शिन्’ (not in AV, वा.सं. १.२८)। सृपि । सृजि । ‘अति॑सृष्टो अ॒पां वृ॑ष॒भः’ (अ.वे. १६.१.१)। सृजि । स्पृशि । ‘विस्पृशः’ (?, Whitney: perhaps a corrupted reading for ‘उ॒परि॒स्पृशः॑,’ अ.वे. ५.३.१०)। स्पृशि । स्फूर्जि । ‘वाश्य॑माना॒भि स्फू॑र्जति’ (अ.वे. १२.५.२०)। स्फूर्जि । स्वरति । ‘वि॒दथा॑भि॒स्वर॑न्ति’ (अ.वे. ९.९.२२)। ‘नि॒र्ऋ॒थो यश्च॑ निस्व॒रः’ (अ.वे. १२.२.१४)। स्वरति । स्मरति । ‘प्रति॑ स्मरेथां तु॒जय॑द्भिः’ (अ.वे. ८.४.७)। Note: The instances cited by the commentary, not traced to the AV, are found in the KV on P.8.3.108 (न रपरसृपिसृजिस्पृशिसवनादीनाम्). The APR (147g: रपरसृपिसृजिस्पृशिस्पृहिस्फूर्जिस्वरतिस्मरतीनां च) looks like a combination of the CA rule and the Pāṇinian rule. All the examples cited by the CAB are found in the same order in APR (147g). We must also note that the APR readings of the examples support Whitney’s conjecture that vispr̥śaḥ of the mss. is a cor- ruption for uparispr̥śaḥ. २.४.२३. गोसन्यादीनां च । Whitney (2.103). B, D: °संन्या°. P: गोसन्यासादीनां च.

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 370 Translation: Nor [the s] of gosani etc. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - गोसन्यादीनां च सकारस्य षकारो न भवति । ‘गो॒सनि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.२०.१०)। ‘वि सी॑म॒तः’ (अ.वे. ४.१.१)। ‘अ॒भि सि॑ष्यदे’ (अ.वे. ५.५.९)। ‘अनु॒ सूतुं॒ सवि॑तवे’ (अ.वे. ६.१७.१-४)। Note: The example gosanim is included in the savanādigaṇa men- tioned in P.8.3.108 (न रपरसृपिसृजिस्पृशिसवनादीनाम्). It is found in the list of this Gaṇa as given in the KV. However, the whole gosanyādigaṇa is listed in APR (147f, p. 101-102) where the examples cited by the CAB appear in the same order. Also see the Note on the previous rule. However, one cannot be certain that the membership of such gaṇas as mentioned in the CA was necessarily identical with the gaṇas as listed in the APR. For example, the gosanyādigaṇa as listed under APR (147f, p. 101) also includes the examples adhi skanda (5.25.8) and abhi skandam (5.14.11), while the CA provides the next rule to take care of these examples, as if they were not included in the gosayādigaṇa. २.४.२४. अध्यभिभ्यां स्कन्देः । Whitney (2.104). O: अध्यबिभ्यां°. Translation: [The s] of the root skand, after adhi and abhi, [is not changed to ṣ]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अधि अभि इत्येताभ्यामुत्तरस्य स्कन्दि- सकारस्य षकारो न भवति । ‘अधि॑ स्कन्द वी॒ड(Whitney: र)य॑स्व’ (अ.वे. ५.२५.८)। ‘अ॒भि॒ स्कन्॑दं मृ॒गीव॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१४.११)। अध्यभिभ्यामिति किमर्थम् । ‘एक॑शतं॒ विष्क॑न्धानि’ (अ.वे. ३.९.६)। Note: The VVRI edition accepts the reading vīrayasva for AV (5.25. 8), but notes the manuscript variant vīḍayasva. The examples cited by the CAB appear in the same order as examples 40-41 on APR (147f). However, see the Note on CA (2.4.23). Whitney notes, “As counter-instance, the commentator brings forward ekaśataṃ viṣkandhāni (iii.9.6), which is a blunder - unless, indeed, the com-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका371 mentator’s grammatical system derives skandha, ‘shoulder,’ from the root skand. An actual example of the kind he seeks to give is pariṣkanda (xv.2.1 etc.).” Whitney’s suspicion that, for the commentator, the word skandha in viṣkandha may have been derived from the root skand finds support in [pseudo-]Sāyaṇa’ commentary on the word viṣkandham in AV (1.16.3): विष्कन्धमिति । स्कन्दिर्गतिशोषणयोः । भावे घञ् । प्रादिसमासे ‘वेः स्कन्देरनिष्ठायाम्’ (पा. ८.३.७३) इति षत्वम् । व्यत्ययेन धकारः. We should note that on pariṣkanda, the VVRI edition notes that a sub- stantial number of manuscripts have the reading pariskanda. Apparently, the northwestern form was cerebralized, while the central and the eastern form was non-cerebralized, according to Pāṇini, cf. P.8.3.74 (परेश्च) and P.8.3.75 (परि- स्कन्दः प्राच्यभरतेषु). २.४.२५. परेः स्तृणातेः । Whitney (2.105). All mss read परेस्तृणातेः. However, I agree with Whitney’s addition of the Visarga. Translation: [The s] of the root str̥, after pari, [is not changed to ṣ]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परेरुत्तरस्य स्तृणातिसकारस्य न षकारो भवति। ‘परि॑ स्तृणीहि॒ परि॑ धेहि॒ वेदि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ७.९९. १)। ‘प॒रि॒स्तर॑ण॒मिद्ध॒विः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.२)। परेरिति किम- र्थम् । ‘वि॒ष्टा॒री जा॒तः’ (अ.वे. ४.३४.१)। Note: On the counter-example offered by the commentator, Whitney remarks: “As counter-example, he can find only viṣṭārījātaḥ (iv.34.1). Viṣṭārin doubtless comes from the root star; yet, as the pada-text does not analyze it, but writes it in its saṃhitā form, it might have been neglected, and the root star added to those rehearsed in rule 102 (= CA 2.4.22), with which it evidently belongs.” २.४.२६. रेफपरस्य च । Whitney (2.106). Hb: रेफस्य च. I: रेफस्य परस्य च. Translation: [The s] followed by r [is not changed to ṣ].

अध्याय २, पाद ४ 372 Note: Rules CA (2.4.22) and the present rule together provide a large class of exceptions to the roots whose initial s changes to ṣ after an appropriate conditioning sound. The common factor shared by these roots is that they contain, after their initial s, either a vocalic or a consonantal r. A similar grouping of roots resistant to cerebralization is found in Pāṇini 8.3.110 (न रपर- सृपिसृजिस्पृशिस्पृहिसवनादीनाम्). Also see the Note on CA (2.4.22). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफपरस्य च सकारस्य न षकारो भवति । ‘सिस्र॑तां॒ नारी॑’ (अ.वे. १.११.१)। ‘प॒रि॒स्रुतः॑ कु॒म्भः’ (अ.वे. ३.१२.७)। ‘प्र भा॒नवः॑ सिस्रते’ (अ.वे. १३.२.४६)। २.४.२७. अभि स्याम पृतन्यतः । Whitney (2.107). A, B, D, O: °तंन्यतः. I: ष्याम for स्याम. I: 26. Translation: [There is no cerebralization of s in] abhi syāma pr̥tanyataḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभि स्याम पृतन्यत इति सकारस्य षकारो न भवति । ‘व॒यम॒भि स्या॑म पृतन्य॒तः’ (अ.वे. ७. ९३.१)। सोपपदग्रहणमेतावत्त्वार्थम् । इह मा भूत् । ‘विश्वाः॒ पृत॑ना अ॒भि ष्या॑म’ (अ.वे. १३.१.२२)। Note: For the citation from AV (7.93.1), all the mss., except W, used by Whitney read ṣyāma and this reading, violating the present rule in the CA, is chosen by Whitney in his edition. Later Whitney changed his mind. He (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 456) remarks: “Most of the saṃhitā-mss. give ṣyāma (our W.O., and two fifths of SPP’s authorities, sy-), and both printed texts read it; but the Prāt. (ii.107 = CA 2.4.27) expressly requires syāma, and that accord- ingly should be the accepted text.” Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 38-39) points out that Lindenau again reversed the reading to fit it with the CA pre- scription, but that the mss. reading probably represents the non-Śaunakīya re- cension of the AV. On AV (13.1.22), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 714) points out that “M.p.m. ∀and SPP’s C.# read at end syāma; the passage is quoted as an instance of -ṣy- in the comm. to Prāt. ii. 107 (= CA 2.4.27).”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका373 With respect to the variation in AV (7.93.1), it is more likely that the situation as seen in the majority of the manuscripts represents an analogical spread of retroflexion in later times. It is non-Śaunakīya only in the sense that it does not represent the situation as codified by the CA. However, one must not preclude the possibility of change within the Śaunakīya oral tradition, as is done by Surya Kanta. The VVRI edition offers the reading अ॒भि ष्या॑म पृतन्य॒तः for AV (7.98.1 = W: 7.93.1), but notes the reading अ॒भि स्या॑म पृतन्य॒तः as a manuscript variant. It would probably be reasonable to assume that there was further spread of retroflexion after the period of the CA, and such a spread accounts for the retroflexion seen in such instances. Secondly, this rule again brings into sharp focus the possibility that the gaṇas such as the gosanyādigaṇa referred to in CA (2.4.23) and APR (147f, p. 101-2) may have had different composition in the two traditions. While the instance abhi syāma pr̥tanyataḥ appears in the list of the gosanyādigaṇa in the APR, its separate treatment by the CA may indicate that the gosanyādigaṇa as conceived by the CA was a smaller collection of exceptions. For another similar case, see the Note on CA (2.4.23). इति द्वितीयाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः । द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः । H, N: ॥१०६॥ इति द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः. E, F: द्वितीयस्य चतुर्थः पादः । आथर्वणे चतुराध्यायिकायां द्वितीयोऽध्यायः. C, J: इति द्वितीयोध्यायः. A, B, D: ॥४॥ इति द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः. M: ॥४॥ चतुर्थः पादः ॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः. I: इति द्वितीया- ध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥४॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुरध्यायिकायां द्वितीयोऽध्यायः ॥२॥ सूत्र १०७ ॥ ऐक्यं २१७. O: इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकायां द्वितीयस्य चतुर्थपादः ॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ ३७ ॥ (The number 37 given in the ms. O is obviously an error for 27). P: ॥४॥ द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥१०६॥ इति द्वितीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः॥ ___________________________________

॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ प्रथमः पादः ॥ ३.१.१. सहावाडन्ते दीर्घः । Whitney (3.1). Translation: Before [a form of] the root sah, ending in āṭ, [the preceding vowel] becomes long. Note: As Whitney notes, the qualification āḍ-anta ‘ending in āṭ’ in this rule achieves the same goal as achieved by the qualification sāḍbhūtasya in CA (2.4.2). Whitney says: “It would not do to say ‘before sah when it be- comes sāh,’ because of the words amitrasāha and abhimātiṣāha, in which, though the vowel of the root is lengthened, the preceding final remains un- changed.” Whitney also notes: “This rule also belongs in the category of the supererogatory, since in none of the words to which it relates does the pada- text afford a different reading from that of the saṃhitā.” A more positive way of interpreting this rule may be to say that it marks a stage of grammatical analysis beyond the stage reached by the Padapāṭha, and hence, even though it does not relate to the conversion of the padas into saṃhitā, it shows us the progression of the grammatical science, cf. P.8.3.56 (सहेः साडः सः). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सहौ परतः आडन्ते दीर्घो भवति । ‘प्राषाट्’ (not in AV)। ‘तु॒रा॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। ‘पृ॒त॒- ना॒षा॒ट्’ (अ.वे. ५.१४.८)। ‘श॒त्रू॒षाण्नी॒षाट्’ (अ.वे. ५.२०. ११)। ‘अ॒भी॒षाड॑स्मि विश्वा॒षाट्’ (१२.१.५४)। आडन्त इति किमर्थम् । ‘प्रसहनम्’ (not in Vedic texts)। Note: While prāṣāṭ is not attested in the ŚAV as we know it, it is listed in the APR (p. 146), along with the other examples cited by the CAB.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका375 ३.१.२. अष्ट पदयोगपक्षपर्णदंष्ट्रचक्रेषु । Whitney (3.2). Translation: [The final a of] aṣṭa [is lengthened] before pada, yoga, pakṣa, parṇa, daṃṣṭra, and cakra. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अष्टेत्यस्य दीर्घो भवति पदयोगपक्ष- पर्णदंष्ट्रचक्र इत्येतेषु परतः । ‘अ॒ष्टाप॑दी चतुर॒क्षी’ (अ.वे. ५.१९.७)। ‘अ॒ष्टाप॑क्षाम्’ (अ.वे. ९.३.२१)। ‘अ॒ष्टा॒यो॒गैः’ (अ.वे. ६.९१.१)। ‘अष्टापर्णः’ । ‘अष्टादंष्ट्रम्’ । ‘अ॒ष्टा- च॑क्रा॒ नव॑द्वारा’ (अ.वे. १०.२.३१)। ‘अ॒ष्टाच॑क्रं वर्तते’ (अ.वे. ११.४.२२)। Note: Whitney remarks that “the rule, moreover, is an unnecessary one, since the pada-text everywhere offers the same reading with the saṃhitā, as is expressly directed by a later rule.” Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) suggests that combinations of aṣṭá with parṇá and dáṃṣṭra, which are not attested in the Vulgate of the AV, may have existed in a genuinely Śaunakīya recension of the AV. I tend to think that these are indications of the CA occa- sionally straying into provisions for a general grammar of Sanskrit. However, in this case, it should be noted that these examples are not found in the KV on P.6.3.125 (अष्टनः संज्ञायाम्). The word aṣṭādaṃṣṭraḥ is found in Āśvalāyana- Śrauta-Sūtra (12.99.9) and Āpastamba-Śrauta-Sūtra (24.8.6), but not in the earlier Vedic texts. The fact that the rule of the CA includes daṃṣṭra, though it is evidently a late usage, shows that the author of the CA was already leaning toward a general grammar of Sanskrit. ३.१.३. व्यधावप्रत्यये । Whitney (3.3). B, J: °वत्प्र°. E, F, I, O, P(orig): व्यवधावप्रत्यये. M: विधाव°. Translation: Before the root vyadh, when it does not end in any affix, [the preceding vowel is lengthened].

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 376 Note: In the examples of this rule, the Padapāṭha is identical with the Saṃhitāpāṭha reading, and hence we need to look at this rule as an advance of grammatical analysis beyond the stage represented by the Padapāṭha. The rule asserts that in a formation like śvā-vit < śvā-vidh < śvā-vyadh, the root vyadh is apratyaya ‘does not end in an affix.’ However, it is clear that here it is a verbal noun. The CA deals with a root-noun as a root without an affix. This needs to be contrasted with Pāṇini’s procedure which adds an affix such as KvIP, where ultimately each component of this affix is deleted, leaving behind a Ø-affix. Pāṇini’s rule which provides lengthening in such cases explicitly refers to the Ø-affix KvI, i.e. P.6.3.116 (नहिवृतिवृषिव्यधिरुचिसहितनिषु क्वौ). Patañjali, however, uses the term apratyaya to refer to such zero-affixes like KvIP, see: MB and Pradīpa on P.1.1.6 with reference to pipaṭhīḥ. On the expression marmāvidham, AV (11.10.26), [pseudo]-Sāyaṇa’s commentary offers a Pāṇinian derivation by adding the affix KvIP to the root vyadh. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यधौ परतः [अ]प्रत्यया[न्]ते दीर्घो भवति । ‘श्वा॒वित्’ (अ.वे. ५.१३.९)। ‘हृ॒द॒या॒विध॑म्’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१८)। ‘म॒र्मा॒विध॑म्’ (only in N, अ.वे. ११. १०.२६)। अप्रत्यय इति किमर्थम् । ‘प्र॒विध्य॑न्तो॒ नाम॑’ (अ.वे. ३.२६.४)। Note: The three examples cited by the CAB are listed under APR (p. 146) in the same order. ३.१.४. उञ इदमूष्वादिषु । Whitney (3.4). Hb, Nb: उभयादि°. After this rule, A, B, D, J, M add: ऊंइसु इतिष्विवादितिपरः. C, E, F, H, I, and N: no such rule. Translation: In [the sequences] idam ū ṣu etc., the particle u (= uñ) [is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उञ इदमूष्वादिषु दीर्घो भवति । ‘इ॒दम षु’ (अ.वे. १.२४.४)। ‘तदू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.१.५)। ‘पर्यू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.६.४)। ‘म॒हीमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ७.६.२)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका377 ‘अ॒न्य ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१६)। ‘स्तु॒ष ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३७)। ‘त्यमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ७.८५.१)। Note: Evidently, Whitney is listing some missing instances: “the other cased afforded by the text are pary ū ṣu (vi.6.4), and para ū te (xviii.3.7).” Of these two, the first one is actually found in the text of the CAB, and Whitney just missed it. It is found in both the manuscripts, one of which, i.e. H, was available to Whitney. About the second example, i.e. para ū te (xviii.3.7), Whitney com- ments: “Were it not for this last case, the rule of our treatise might have been constructed like that of the Vāj. Pr., which says (iii.109) that u before su is lengthened.” The gaṇa referred to in this CA rule is fully spelled out in APR (207a) and the examples listed there occur exactly in the same order as in the CAB. The example which is added by Whitney and which is not given by our commentary here is the last example in the APR list. It is not clear why the CAB did not list this example. It could be an example of omission, or it may represent a change in usage. Compare this rule with Pāṇini 6.3.134 (इकः सुञि), which has slightly wider coverage, but represents a generalization of the type demanded by Whitney in his comments cited above. ३.१.५. ओषधेरपञ्चपद्याम् । Whitney (3.5). Translation: [The final i] of the word oṣadhi [is lengthened] before [case endings] other than the first five [i.e. nominative sg., du., pl., and accusative sg., and du.]. Note: Whitney translates the condition apañcapadyām as ‘except in the strong cases,’ and then assumes that this condition leaves everything else open, including a situation where oṣadhi occurs as the first member of a com- pound, and is followed by the second member. With such a wider interpretation, he comments: “Since the rule does not restrict itself to forms of declension, it is guilty of an oversight in taking no account of the compound oṣadhija (x.4.23 : p. oṣadhi-ja) as a farther exception. In the only other compounds which the text affords - viz. oṣadhīsaṃśita (x.5.32 : p. oṣadhi- saṃśita), and oṣadhīmant (xix.17.6; 18.6) - the rule of the Prātiśākhya is observed.”

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 378 The closely similar rule in Pāṇini’s grammar, i.e. P.6.3.132 (ओषधेश्च विभक्तावप्रथमायाम्), clearly seems to restrict this lengthening before a case ending, other than the nominative, and it seems likely that the CA rule also applies be- fore case endings alone, and not to the situations of compounds. If so, how would one deal with the examples of compounds brought up by Whitney? The APR may provide some assistance in this direction. The example oṣadhī- saṃśita is included in a gaṇa of compound expressions showing similar lengthening of the final vowel of the first member, cf. APR (208, pp. 125-6). Though, it is true that there is no specific CA rule which would take care of this lengthening. On the other hand, the text of the Padapāṭha, as given by the VVRI edition reads: oṣadhī-saṃśitaḥ. This is different from the pada-reading cited by Whitney. But, if this reading is somehow valid, then this may not have been viewed as a case of lengthening at all, since the long vowel was al- ready there in the Padapāṭha. The instance oṣadhīmant is clearly taken care of by CA (3.1.17: बहुलं मतौ). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ओषधेः अपञ्चपद्यां दीर्घो भवति । ‘ओष॑धीभिः’ (अ.वे. २.१०.२)। ‘ओष॑धी(H, N: धि)भ्याम्’ (not in AV)। ‘ओष॑धीभ्यः’ (अ.वे. ६.२०.२)। ‘ओष॑धी- नाम्’ (अ.वे. ३.५.१)। ‘ओष॑धीषु’ (अ.वे. १.३०.३)। अपञ्चपद्यामिति किमर्थम् । ‘इ॒यं ह॒ मह्यं॒ त्वामोष॑धिः’ (अ.वे. ७.३८.५)। Note: The manuscript H mostly writes ॐ for ओ. ३.१.६. जीवन्तीमोषधीम् । Whitney (3.6). O: जीवंतीमोषधीमहं. Translation: [The i of the word oṣadhi is also lengthened in the word oṣadhīm only in the phrase] jīvantīm oṣadhīm. Note: Pāṇini 6.3.132 (ओषधेश्च विभक्तावप्रथमायाम्) prescribes lengthen- ing of oṣadhi before all non-nominative case-endings, and hence जीवन्तीमोषधीम् would be a normal formation in that system, while इमां खनाम्योषधिम् would be an exceptional case. The situation is reverse with the CA formations.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका379 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जीवन्तीमोषधीमिति च दीर्घो भवति । ‘जी॒व॒न्तीमोष॑धीम॒हम्’ (अ.वे. ८.२.६; ७.६)। सोपपदग्रह- णमेतावत्त्वार्थम् । इह मा भूत् । ‘इ॒मां ख॑ना॒म्योष॑धिम्’ (अ.वे. ३.१८.१)। ‘ओष॑धिं शेप॒हर्ष॑णीम्’ (अ.वे. ४.४.१)। Note: [Pseudo-]Sāyaṇa reads oṣadhīm in AV (3.18.1), but oṣadhim in AV (4.4.1). Could this be taken as an indication that [Pseudo-]Sāyaṇa was not familiar with the rules of the CA, which he fails to quote even once in his entire commentary? ३.१.७. साढः । Whitney (3.7). Translation: [The vowel a in the root sah in the form] sāḍha [is lengthened]. Note: Whitney comments: “The rule is one of the most utterly super- fluous presented by our treatise, which, of course, has nothing to do with the mode of formation of such words. Moreover, if it was inclined to do a work of supererogation as regards them, it should not have omitted to notice also rūḍhvā, rūḍha, mūḍha, gūḍha, and other like forms which the text contains. Probably the reason why this particular one was noticed, and not the others, is that the regular form, according to the rules of the general grammar, is soḍha.” Whitney’s last comment is the correct reason. Pāṇini too provides special treatment only for this form, and not the other ones, which are derived by the normal rules of his grammar. The normal rule, i.e. P.6.3.112 (सहिवहोरोदवर्णस्य), changes the a of the root sah to o to derive the form soḍha. However, the next rule, i.e. P.6.3.113 (साढ्यै साढ्वा साढेति निगमे), admits as nipātanas exceptional forms like sāḍha for the Vedic language (nigame). For some reason, sāḍheti in P.6.3.113, is analyzed by the Kāśikāvr̥tti as साढा इति, rather than as साढ इति, and the commentary takes sāḍhā to be a nominative form of sāḍhr̥- : साढेति तृचि रूपमेतत्. However, it does not cite any example for it. The SK on this rule of- fers the example sāḷhā (= sāḍhā). But, interestingly, the commentary Subo- dhinī says that the rule should also be applicable to the past participle sāḍha : सूत्रे इतिशब्दः प्रकारार्थः । तेन निष्ठायामपि निपातनं बोध्यम् । ‘अषाळ्हो अग्ने वृषभः ।’ In general, the Pāṇinian commentators show little familiarity with the AV tradition.

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 380 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - साढश्च दीर्घो भवति । ‘वा॒चा सा॒ढः पर॑स्त॒राम्’ (अ.वे. ५.३०.९)। ३.१.८. बहुलं रात्रेः । Whitney (3.8). Translation: [The final i] of rātri is diversely [lengthened]. Note: Whitney takes the author of the CA to the woodshed: “This is rather a discreditable confession on the part of our treatise, whose business it is to settle authoritatively the reading of its school in all cases admitting of any doubt, that it does not feel equal to dealing with the irregularities of the word in question. Nothing like it has hitherto met us, but we shall find several in- stances in that which follows.” It is understandable that a similar appeal to di- versity and irregularity of Vedic usage is found in Pāṇini 4.1.31 (रात्रेश्चाजसौ). However, Pāṇini’s appeal is more acceptable, since he aimed at describing the diversity of Sanskrit at large. On the other hand, we do indeed expect a more exact accounting from a Prātiśākhya text. The use of bahulam in this and other rules again indicates occasional leanings of the author of the CA in the direction of a general grammar of Sanskrit. This is also apparent from Whitney’s comment: “It is also a very unnecessary acknowledgment; for, in the first place, there was no such rule as this absolutely called for, since the pada- text everywhere reads all the forms of rātri like the saṃhitā.” To look a little deeper into the wording of the rule, one may point out that the genitive rātreḥ suggests that, for the author of the CA, as for Pāṇini - cf. P.4.1.31 -, the basic stem form was rātri, and not rātrī, and the CA rule may be taken literally to indicate the deemed deviant character of this word, a stem in short i, occasionally providing forms in the text of the AV unpredictably (bahulam) as if it were a stem in long ī. However, I agree with Whitney’s criti- cism that we should expect from a Prātiśākhya a more exact account. For some reason, the APR also does not take account of the diverse behavior of rātri. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - बहुलं रात्रेः दीर्घो भवति । ‘रात्री॑(H, N: त्रि)भिः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१०)। ‘रात्री॑भ्याम्’ । ‘रात्री॑- भ्यः’। ‘रात्री॑णाम्’ (अ.वे. ४.५.४)। ‘रात्रीषु’ । बहुल-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका381 ग्रहणात् न च भवति । ‘व्रात्य॒ एकां॒ रात्रि॑म्’ (अ.वे. १५. १३.१)। Note: Whitney’s text for AV (18.1.10) reads rātrībhiḥ. The manu- scripts H and N both read rātribhiḥ. However, considering the later comment in the commentary, i.e. बहुलग्रहणात् न च भवति, I suspect that the reading in- tended by the commentator must have been rātrībhiḥ. This reading is also sup- ported by the VVRI edition. ३.१.९. विश्वस्य नरवसुमित्रेषु । Whitney (3.9). Translation: [The final a] of viśva is [diversely lengthened] before nara, vasu, and mitra. Note: Whitney points out that the examples brought together here are heterogeneous. The word viśvānara is not broken up in the Padapāṭha into its components. On the other hand, viśvāvasu of the Saṃhitā is represented as viśva-vasu in the Padapāṭha. The word viśvāmitra is unchanged in the Padapāṭha, while the word viśvamitrāḥ in AV (18.3.63, 4.54) is analyzed in the Padapāṭha as viśva-mitrāḥ. Whitney also argues that it is difficult to justify the continuity of the word bahulam into this rule from the previous rule. However, his arguments against the continuity of bahulam are not strong. Compare Pāṇini 6.3.128 (विश्वस्य वसुराटोः), 6.3.129 (नरे संज्ञायाम्), and 6.3.130 (मित्रे चर्षौ). Pāṇini makes a semantic distinction between viśvānara vs viśvanara, and viśvā- mitra vs viśvamitra. The lengthened forms are names, while non-lengthened forms are descriptions. For example, on viśvamitrāḥ in AV (18.3.63), the commentary of [pseudo-]Sāyaṇa renders it as सर्वजनमित्रभूताः, and not as mem- bers of Viśvāmitra’s clan. Also see Whitney’s note on this verse (AV Trans- lation, Vol.II., p. 866). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विश्व इत्येतस्य बहुलं दीर्घो भवति नरवसुमित्र इत्येतेषु परतः । ‘वि॒श्वान॑रे अक्रमत(H, N: त्)’ (अ.वे. ४.११.७)। ‘या वि॒श्वाव॑सुम्’ (अ.वे. २.२.४)। ‘वि॒श्वामि॑त्र॒ जम॑दग्ने’ (अ.वे. १८.३.१६)। न च भवति । ‘तम॑र्चत वि॒श्वमि॑त्राः’ (अ.वे. १८.३.६३; १८.४.५४)।

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 382 ३.१.१०. शुनः पदे । Whitney (3.10). Translation: [The a] of śvan [is diversely lengthened] before pada. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शुन इत्यस्य पदे परतः बहुलं दीर्घो भवति । ‘अथो॒ सर्वं॒ श्वाप॑दम्’ (अ.वे. ११.९.१०)। ‘श्वाप॑दो॒ मक्षि॑काः’ (अ.वे. ११.१०.८)। ‘उ॒त वा॒ श्वाप॑दः’ (अ.वे. १८.३.५५)। न च भवति । ‘व्या॒घ्रः श्वप॑दामिव’ (अ.वे. ८.५.११; १९.३९.४)। Note: Whitney raises an objection to the continuation of the word ba- hulam into the last two rules, and states that it certainly does not continue into the next rule. However, how do we then account for the exceptional behavior of the examples introduced by the commentator with the phrase: न च भवति? We should also note that the exception is followed by all the editions of the AV and is supported by the manuscripts. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 492) says, “Prāt. iii.10 (= CA 3.1.10) notes the double form śvápad and śvā́pad.” However, one must agree with Whitney that the rules do not have any clear indications about the continuation and cessation of bahulam. It certainly does not continue into the next rule. However, looking at the examples avail- able in the AV text, the commentary is justified in continuing this word in these two rules. ३.१.११. उपसर्गस्य नामिनो दस्ति । Whitney (3.11). A, B, D, J, M, P: omit स्य. A, B, D: °र्ग्र°. I: 11. Translation: [The final] nāmin [i.e. any vowel other than a and ā] of a pre-verb [is lengthened] before t of the root dā. Note: Whitney notes that the two attested examples cited by the commentator appear in an identical form in the Padapāṭha and the Saṃhitā- pāṭha.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका383 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्गस्य नाम्यन्तस्य ददातौ परतः तकारादौ दीर्घो भवति । ‘नीत्ता(H, N: ता)’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘वीत्ता’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘परीत्तिः’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘अप्र॑तीत्तम्’ (अ.वे. ६.११७.१)। ‘प॒री॒त्तः॒’ (अ.वे. ६.९२.२)। नामिन इति किमर्थम् । ‘प्रत्तम्’ (not in AV, तै.सं. २.२.८.४, मै.सं. १.६.९)। ‘अवत्तम्’ (not in AV, तै.सं. ६.३.१०.४, मै.सं. ३.१०.१)। Note: The commentator quotes a number of forms not attested in the AV. The forms apratīttam, parīttaḥ, prattam, avattam are listed under APR (217, p. 145). Also see the examples cited in the KV under Pāṇini 6.3.124 (दस्ति), which include nīttam, vīttam, parīttam, prattam, and avattam. ३.१.१२. वर्तादिषु । Whitney (3.12). E, F, H, N, O, P: °र्त्ता°. A, B, C, D, Hb: वा°. Translation: Before varta etc., [the final vowel of the pre- ceding item is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वर्तादिषु परतः दीर्घो भवति । ‘अ॒भी॒- व॒र्तेन॑’ (अ.वे. १.२९.१)। ‘विश्व॑म॒न्याम॑भी॒वार॑’ (अ.वे. १. ३२.४)। Note: Whitney, reading only from the manuscript H, believed that the paraphrase of this rule had some missing words, which, if restored, would read: उपसर्गस्य नाम्यन्तस्य वर्तादिषु परतः दीर्घो भवति. However, the second manu- script, N, does not support this wording. The gaṇa referred to in this rule is fully listed in APR (207b). It contains a listing of 21 instances. The CAB quotes the first two instances from this list. It may have also contained the cases listed under APR (208). APR (207b, p. 124): उपसर्गस्योत्तरपदे दीर्घः, and the 21 cases listed under this rule take care of the cases of the nāmin vowel of an upasarga being length- ened before varta etc. However, Whitney lists a whole host of expressions where the preceding is not an upasarga, nor does it necessarily end in a nāmin vowel, and yet one finds lengthening. Many of these cases are found listed

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 384 under the next rule of the APR, i.e. APR (208, p. 125-6). One may assume that, contrary to Whitney’s expectation, the present CA rule had a general ap- plication, not restricted to upasargas ending in a nāmin vowel, and that it may have intended to encompass the examples covered by the two consecutive rules of the APR, i.e. APR (207b, and 208). I would just like to note in passing, that the lists of examples offered by Whitney do not completely match the ones found under APR (207b, and 208), and the discrepancies need to be individually investigated. They may possibly indicate changes in the transmitted text of the AV. ३.१.१३. अकारस्याभ्यासस्य बहुलम् । Whitney (3.13). Translation: The a of a reduplication is diversely [length- ened]. Note: The word bahulam in the rule seems to be there to take care of examples like sasahe cited by the commentator. It may be noted that the APR (209, p. 126) reads अभ्यासस्य दीर्घश्छन्दसि. It is a somewhat strange formulation in that one would expect a text like the APR to be concerned with the language of chandas alone, and, therefore, one sees no purpose in the use of chandasi, except to indicate that the forms where this kind of lengthening does not take place are more like the non-chandas language. The gaṇa listed under this rule cites examples of lengthening alone. The APR rule is also not restricted to the vowel a of the reduplication. The rule contains no such restriction, and the gaṇa contains the example jīhīḍa, the only case of non-a vowel. This example is taken care of by the next rule of the CA. Whitney draws our attention to the forms rūrupaḥ (iv.7.5), rīriṣaḥ (v.3.8), and śūśucaḥ (xviii.2.4), and says: “The Prātiśākhya may intend to include these forms in the gaṇa of rule 21 (= CA 3.1.21), below, but they would much more properly have been provided for in the present rule.” Indeed, the nārakādigaṇa referred to in CA (3.1.21), and as fully elaborated under APR (212, p. 129) contains the first two examples cited by Whitney. However, it is not clear why these examples were not covered by APR (209). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अकारस्याभ्यासस्य बहुलं दीर्घो भवति। ‘दा॒धृ॒षुः॒’ (अ.वे. १.२७.३)। ‘अ॒भि॒वा॒वृ॒धे’ (अ.वे.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका385 १.२९.१)। ‘वा॒वृ॒धेते॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१.५)। ‘जी॒तस्य॑ वावृ॒तुः’ (अ.वे. ५.१९.१३)। न च भवति । ‘अ॒नेन॒ [विश्वा॑] ससहे’ (अ.वे. १.१६.३)। ‘न स॑सहे॒ शत्रू॑न्’ (अ.वे. २.५.३)। Note: Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 17) points out that “the short a in the reduplication of sasahe in c, though against the meter and in part against usage, is read by all the mss., and in the comment to Prāt. iii.13 (= CA 3.1.13).” On AV (2.5.3), Whitney has further describes how certain texts, as well as manuscripts of the AV, rectify the metrical deficiency by reading the form as sasāhé (AV Transl. Vol.I., p.44). Whitney (ibid., p. 28) notes that Sāyaṇa’s commentary on AV (1.27.3) reads dādr̥śuḥ. The first four examples, excluding the counter-examples, are cited un- der APR (209). ३.१.१४. जीहीडाहम् । Whitney (3.14). Translation: [Also, in the form jīhīḍa in the phrase] jīhīḍā- ham, [the vowel of the reduplication is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जीहीडाहमिति च दीर्घो भवति । ‘अ॒क्र॒तुर्ज॑ीहीडा॒हम्’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.५)। न च भवति । ‘यद्वा॑ पि॒ताप॑राद्धो जिही॒डे’ (अ.वे. ६.११६.२)। Note: Whitney rightly objects to the continuation of bahulam into this rule as is clearly implied by the commentator. The counter-example given by the commentary does not contain the word jīhīḍāham, but merely the word jihīḍe. The form jīhīḍa is listed as a case of lengthening of the reduplication under APR (209, p. 127). The APR rule says that this lengthening of the re- duplication occurs chandasi. However, it does not make any effort to show how such lengthening is avoided in the form jihīḍe, except by not listing it in the gaṇa. In this case, the CA rule foregoes the generalization, and cites the specific case where the lengthening takes place. On the reading jīhīḍāham in AV (4.32.5), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 204) points out that the RV reading is jihīḍāham, “although the AV. saṃhitā reading is unquestionably jīhīḍ-; the saṃhitā mss. have this almost without ex-

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 386 ception (all ours save O.), the pada-mss. put after the word their sign which shows a difference between pada and saṃhitā reading, and jīh- is twice dis- tinctly prescribed by the Prāt. (iii.14 = CA 3.1.14; iv.87 = CA 4.3.15).” ३.१.१५. साह्याम । Whitney (3.15). C, Hc, Nc: स°. Translation: [Also, in the form] sāhyāma [the vowel of the root sah is lengthened]. Note: Quite clearly, this is not a case of the lengthening of a redupli- cation, and hence needed to be dealt with separately. The APR (212, p. 129) lists this form in the nārakādigaṇa referred to also in CA (3.1.21). Obviously, the membership of these gaṇas as conceived by these texts was different. Under the present rule, Whitney cites a number of “causative forms from ver- bal roots which show in the first or radical syllable a short a in pada and a long ā in saṃhitā, and which are not specially noted in this section, being left, appar- ently, to fall into the gaṇa of rule 21 (= CA 3.1.21), below. … They are yāvaya etc. (e.g. i.20.3), from yu; cyāvayati etc. (e.g. x.1.13), from cyu; vānayantu (vi.9.3), from van; yāmaya (vi.137.3), from yam; and glāpayanta (ix.9. 10), from glā.” Most of these forms, except the forms of yam, are listed in the nārakādigaṇa of the APR (212, pp. 129-130), which is also referred to by CA (3.1.21). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - साह्यामेति च दीर्घो भवति । ‘सा॒ह्याम॒ दास॒मार्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.१)। ३.१.१६. विद्मादीनां शरादिषु । Whitney (3.16). C: विघ्नादीनां°. Translation: [The final vowels] of vidma etc. [are length- ened] before śara etc. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विद्मादीनां शरादिषु परतः बहुलं दीर्घो भवति। ‘वि॒द्मा श॒रस्य॑ पि॒तर॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.२.१)। ‘ए॒वा

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका387 रोगं॑ चास्रा॒वम्’ (अ.वे. १.२.४)। ‘ए॒वा मे॑ प्राण॒ मा बि॑भेः’ (अ.वे. २.१५.१)। Note: The APR does not have a single gaṇa which encompasses all of these examples. The examples of the lengthening of eva are listed under APR (216c, p. 134). But this list does not include verbs like vidmā. Verbs with similar lengthening are listed under APR (215c, 215d, p. 132), but these lists do not include the form vidmā. Whitney has given the full statistics of both of these Gaṇas as they are found in the text of the AV. Unlike the Gaṇapāṭha in the Pāṇinian school, we have no complete listings of Gaṇas mentioned in the CA. Also, it is clear that there is no reason to continue the word bahulam into this rule. Had the word bahulam continued into this rule, there would be no need to mention it ex- pressly in the following rule: बहुलं मतौ. ३.१.१७. बहुलं मतौ । Whitney (3.17). Hb, Nb: बहुमतविछायां. Translation: Before the [affix] mat, [the preceding vowel is] diversely [lengthened]. Note: Whitney notes that mat in this rule also covers vat. It is the same affix for Pāṇini with the change of m to v, cf. P.8.2.9. The examples in the commentary here cover only the latter. The same coverage is found in APR (210, pp. 127-8). The only example of mat is tviṣīmat. Its instances are included in the APR list, and the same example is cited by Whitney. The APR (210) offers a long list of instances, out of which the CAB quotes the first three instances. Here, a major difference emerges between the treatment of the same topic by these two texts. Since the CA frames its rules in a generic way, it uses the term bahulam, and then the commentator is forced to offer instances where the lengthening does not take place. On the other hand, the APR expects to provide full listings where the particular change takes place, and hence it often does not feel the need to cite the exceptions. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मतौ परतः बहुलं दीर्घो भवति । ‘शा॒लेऽश्वा॑वती’ (अ.वे. ३.१२.२)। ‘अश्वा॑वती॒र्गोम॑तीः’ (अ.वे. ३.१६.७)। ‘अश्वा॑वतीं॒ प्र त॑र’ (अ.वे. १८.२.३१)।

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 388 न च भवति । ‘वी॒रव॑तीः॒ सद॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.१६.७)। ‘घृ॒त- व॑ती॒ पय॑स्व॒त्युच्छ्र॑यस्व’ (अ.वे. ३.१२.२)। ३.१.१८. इच्छायां च यकारादौ । Whitney (3.18), A, B, C, D, E, F, H, J, M, N, O, P: °छायां°. I: °च्छायां°. Translation: Also, in a desire-expressing form, before a y- initial [suffix], [the final vowel of the base is diversely lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इच्छायां च यकारादौ बहुलं दीर्घो भवति । ‘अ॒ध्व॒री॒य॒ताम्’ (अ.वे. १.४.१)। ‘वृ॒षा॒यमा॑णः’ (अ.वे. २.५.७)। ‘श॑त्रूय॒तीम॒भि’ (अ.वे. ३.१.३)। न च भवति । ‘अ॒रा॒ति॒यात्’ (अ. वे. ४.३६.१)। ‘ज॒नि॒यन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. १४.२.७२)। ‘पु॒त्रि॒यन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. १४.२.७२)। ‘मृ॒ग॒युः’ (अ.वे. १०.१.२६) प्रभृतीनि च । Note: By referring to the corresponding RV (vii.96.4a, b) forms janī- yántaḥ and putrīyántaḥ, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 767) remarks: “That our denominatives [in AV] have a right to their short i is further vouched for by their quotation as examples for it under Prāt. iii.18 (= CA 3.1.18).” The examples cited by the CAB are found in the same order on APR (154: यकारादौ बहुलं दीर्घः), including the exceptions. Even the word प्रभृतीनि च is found in the APR (p. 108). Also see the examples on APR (211, pp. 128-129). This close correspondence shows that the CAB and the APR belong to the same basic tradition. ३.१.१९. तृतीयान्तस्य । Whitney (3.19). Translation: The final [vowel] of an instrumental form [is diversely lengthened].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका389 Note: Whitney notes: “In the form of this rule there is nothing which continues the implication of bahulam, but such an implication is, of course, un- avoidably necessary, and is made by the commentator.” Whitney has provided statistics for tenā and yenā, cf. Whitney (1862: p. 132). Additionally, he points to forms sahasyenā, bhadreṇā, amr̥tenā, kāvyenā, and martyenā each of which occurs only once. I have not located any treatment of these lengthened forms in the APR. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तृतीयान्तस्य बहुलं दीर्घो भवति । ‘येना॑ स॒हस्रं॒ वह॑सि॒ येना॑ग्ने सर्ववेद॒सम्’ (अ.वे. ९.५.१७)। न च भवति । ‘केन॒ श्रोत्रि॑यमाप्नोति’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२०)। ३.१.२०. रलोपे । Whitney (3.20). E, F, I, O: रलोपे पूर्वस्य. Translation: When [a final] r is deleted [before an initial r, the preceding vowel is lengthened]. Note: See the Note on CA (2.1.19), which prescribes the deletion of an r before an r. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रलोपे दीर्घो भवति । ‘पुना रक्तं वासः’ (not in Vedic texts)। ‘पुना॑ रू॒पाणि॑’ (अ.वे. १.२४. ४)। ‘ज॒घ्नू रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ४.३७.१)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्ष॑ांसि’ (अ.वे. ८.३.२६)। ‘अ॒ग्नी रक्षः॑’ (अ.वे. १२.३.४३)। किमर्थमिदं नोदाह्रियते । ‘पु॒रू॒ची रा॒यः’ (अ.वे. २.१३.३)। यद्यपि रलोपो दीर्घ एवैषः । Note: The example punā raktaṃ vāsaḥ cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. This example is cited in the KV on P.8.3.14 (ro ri). Whitney’s reading of the last few sentences of the commentary was: kim artham idam nodārddhate : purūcī rāyaḥ : yady api ralopo dīrgha evaivaḥ.

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 390 With both the manuscripts in my possession, I have now been able to give a better reading. ३.१.२१. नारकादीनां प्रथमस्य । Whitney (3.21). Translation: For words like nāraka [or words listed in the nārakādi-gaṇa?] the first [vowel is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नारकादीनां प्रथमस्य दीर्घो भवति । ‘नार॑कम्’ (अ.वे. १२.४.३६)। ‘साद॑नम्’ (अ.वे. २.१२. ७)। ‘आस॑त इन्द्र’ (अ.वे. ८.४.८)। Note: The gaṇa referred to in this rule is fully listed in the APR (212: प्रथमस्य दीर्घः). It contains a total of 28 instances, out of which the CAB quotes the first three instances in exactly the same order. However, for many words listed in the nārakādigaṇa in the APR, the CA has separate rules, and hence the membership of this list as intended by the CA and the APR could not have been identical, cf. Notes on CA (3.1.13, and 3.1.15). Surya Kanta (APR, p. 75) points out: “Whitney cites sūyamān (AV 4. 27.1) on nārakādīnām prathamasya III.21, which is not found in the printed AV. text and is contradicted by our treatise.” Surya Kanta is referring to the reading as suyamān. Whitney, however, does note the variation of the mss. readings, cf. AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 196, and is not as absolute in his opinion as implied by Surya Kanta. ३.१.२२. दीदायादीनां द्वितीयस्य । Whitney (3.22). B, M, N: दीर्घदाया°. J: No such rule. Translation: For words like dīdāyat, the second [vowel is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीदायत् आदीनां द्वितीयस्य दीर्घो भवति । ‘दी॒दा॒य॒त्’ (अ.वे. ३.८.३)। ‘उ॒षासो॑ वी॒रव॑तीः’ (अ.वे. ३.१६.७)। ‘उ॒षासा॒नक्ता॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१२.६)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका391 Note: The gaṇa referred to in this rule is fully listed in APR (213: द्वितीयस्य दीर्घः). It contains a total of seven instances, and the CAB quotes the first three instances in exactly the same order. Whitney says: “The only other word of like character which I have noted in the Atharvan is śrathāya (vii.83.3: p. śrathaya).” The gaṇa as listed in the APR contains śrathāya. ३.१.२३. सात्रासाहादीनामुत्तरपदाद्यस्य । Whitney (3.23). O: °दीनांमुत्त°. Translation: For [compound expressions like] sātrāsāha, the first vowel of the second member [is lengthened]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सात्रासाहादीनाम् उत्तरपदाद्यस्य दीर्घो भवति । ‘सा॒त्रा॒सा॒हस्य॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१३.६)। ‘अ॒मि॒त्र॒सा॒हः’ (अ.वे. १.२०.४)। ‘वि॒षा॒स॒हिः’ (अ.वे. १.२९.६)। Note: The gaṇa referred to in this rule is fully listed in APR (214). Out of a total of seven instances listed, the CAB quotes the first three in exactly the same order. Whitney adds abhimātiṣāhaḥ (AV 4.32.4), nyāyanam (AV 6.77.2), and ukthaśāsaḥ (AV 18.3.21). On the last one, he says: “which the pada-texts of the Rik and White Yajus write uktha-śasaḥ, … is read in our pada (xviii.3.21) uktha-śāsaḥ.” Of these three examples, the first and the last are listed in the sātrāsāhādigaṇa under APR (214, p. 131). Also, the Padapāṭha for ukthaśāsaḥ is given as uktha-śasaḥ in the VVRI edition, and by Surya Kanta (APR, p. 131). The VVRI edition notes uktha-śāsaḥ as a variant pada-reading. However, the inclusion of this instance in the sātrāsāhādigaṇa in the APR makes the pada-reading uktha-śāsaḥ less likely. The APR list also includes yama-sādana (AV 12.5.64), which is not cited by Whitney. ३.१.२४. ऋत वृधवरीवानेषु । Whitney (3.24). Hb, Nb: °वध°. Translation: [The final a of] r̥ta [is lengthened], before vr̥dha, varī, and vāna.

अध्याय ३, पाद १ 392 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऋतेत्यस्य दीर्घो भवति वृधवरीवाने- त्येतेषु परतः । वृध । ‘ऋ॒ता॒वृधः॑(H, N: °म्)’ (अ.वे. ११. ६.१९)। वृध । वरी। ‘ऋ॒ताव॑री य॒ज्ञिये॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६२. १)। वरी । वान । ‘ऋ॒तावा॑नं वैश्वान॒रम्(N: रः)’ (अ.वे. ६.३६.१)। Note: All the examples cited in the commentary here are found as examples 16-18 under APR (208). However, the order of the examples is: -vr̥dha, -vāna, and -varī. ३.१.२५. अध त्यंधीःपरवर्जम् । Whitney (3.25). P: °परि°. Translation: [The final a of] adha [is lengthened], except when followed by tyam or dhīḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अधेत्यस्य दीर्घो भवति त्यंधीःपर- वर्जम् । ‘अधा॒ यथा॑ नः’ (अ.वे. १८.३.२१)। ‘अधा॑ पि॒तॄँ- रुप॑ द्रव’ (अ.वे. १८.२.२३)। त्यंधीःपरवर्जमिति किमर्थम्। ‘अध॒ त्यं द्र॒प्सम्’ (अ.वे. १८.१.२१)। ‘अध॒ धीर॑जायत’ (अ.वे. १८.१.२१)। ‘अधेति व्यञ्जने(H,N: न, Whit., APR 216b: °ने) दीर्घो वर्जयित्वा त्यधी(APR 216b: त्यं धीः)परम् । स्वरादा(H, N: °दारा, W: रादा)वथ(N: वथ, Whitney: वपि, Surya Kanta: वध)सर्वत्र व्यञ्जने ह्रस्व (Surya Kanta: °नेऽह्रस्व)एव तु ॥’ (= APR 216b) Note: The phenomenon covered by the present CA rule is covered by APR (216b, p. 133), and the verse cited in the CAB is identical with APR (216b), except that in b it reads: त्यं धीः परं. Except the first example of the CAB, all the other examples are found under APR (216b).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका393 Whitney, who could read the cited verse only imperfectly from his manuscript, renders it as: “adha is long before a consonant, excepting the cases in which it is followed by tyam and dhīḥ; but before a consonant preceded by a vowel (?) it is everywhere only short.” The same verse in APR (216b, Notes, p. 63) is rendered by Surya Kanta as: “The final of adha is lengthened before a consonant, except tyam and dhīḥ. It is invariably adha (with a short a) before the initial vowel of the following word; but before a consonant it is long.” The way this meaning is extracted from the verse is by slightly emending verse. Surya Kanta says: “Emend MS, atha into adha and put an avagraha mark be- tween -ne and hra- (= ne ’hra).” Whitney points to “yet another case in the text in which the final vowel is left short, and which has been overlooked both by treatise and commentator: it is adha syāma (xviii.3.17).” Surya Kanta (APR, Notes, p. 63) says that even though the manuscripts report this reading without variants, it “may be, accordingly, corrected into adhā.” The VVRI edition reads adha syāma, but notes that the manuscripts P and P2 for the Padapāṭha give the reading adhā syāma. The absence of this example in the listing of examples as well as counter-examples provided under APR (216b, pp. 133-4) needs a careful answer. One way to sort this out is to assume that the APR list of positive examples is illustrative and not exhaustive. Then, since the present case is not covered by the exceptions, we assume that the APR knew this instance as adhā syāma. A similar argument must be made for the example adhā yathā naḥ (AV 18.3.21), which is offered by the CAB, but is not found in the list given under APR (216b). इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः । H, N: तृतीयस्य प्रथमपादः. E, F: तृतीयस्य प्रथमः पादः. A, B, D, M, P: प्रथमः पादः. I: इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य प्रथमः पादः. O: तृतीयस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ २५ ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तृतीयस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ ____________________________

॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ द्वितीयः पादः ॥ ३.२.१. पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विः । Whitney (3.26). Translation: At the end of a word, a consonant is doubled. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विर्भवति । ‘गो॒धुक्क्’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.६)। ‘वि॒राट्ट्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.८)। ‘दृ॒षत्त्’ (अ.वे. २.३१.१)। ‘त्रि॒ष्टुप्प्’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२०)। Note: Whitney’s remarks on this rule are most virulent: “The subject of the duplicated pronunciation of consonants, or of the varṇakrama, … is one of the most peculiar in the whole phonetical science of the Hindus. It is also the one, to my apprehension, which exhibits most strikingly their characteristic tendency to arbitrary and artificial theorizing; I have not succeeded in discov- ering the foundation of fact upon which their superstructure of rules is based, or explaining to myself what actual phonetic phenomena, liable to occur in a natural, or even a strained, mode of utterance, they supposed themselves to have noted, and endeavored thus to reduce to systematic form.” On the other hand, as Whitney himself notes: “The varṇakrama, however, forms a not in- conspicuous part of the phonetic system of all the Prātiśākhyas, and is even presented by Pāṇini (viii.4.46-52), although the latter mercifully allows us our option as to whether we will or will not observe its rules.” However, one should note that Pāṇini’s rules cited by Whitney do not relate to the doubling of consonants in the word-final position. Referring to this rule, Lanman (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 832) comments: “Considering the exaggerated nicety of the theory of the Hindus respecting consonant groups (cf. Whitney, AV Prāt., p. 584-90), and in particular their doctrine of the varṇakrama (‘at the end of a word, a consonant is pronounced double,’ padānte vyañjanaṃ dviḥ, Prāt. iii. 26 = CA 3.2.1), it is strange that the mss. sometimes fail to come up even to the simple requirements of orthography as set by grammar and sense. On the other hand, it can hardly be said that the mss. in the cases of these shortcomings are a less truthful representation of the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका395 actual connected utterance of the text than would be for instance the graphical representation of the English some more by the words some ore.” It is of course correctly assumed by Lanman that the reciters and the copyists have no inkling of the meaning of the expressions being recited or copied, and hence such multiple mechanical reproductions are all the more likely. Neither the manuscripts of the AV, nor those of the CA, show this doubling of the final consonants. This also goes against the general tendency of the language reflected in Pāṇini 8.2.23 (संयोगान्तस्य लोपः). Perhaps this doc- trine represents a deliberate effort to counter the weakening of the final conso- nants as evidenced by Prakrits. This may also be an ancient interpretation of the final unreleased unexploded consonant, cf. RPR (6.39-42). To make the non-release clear, one needs to lengthen the silence. I owe this suggestion to Professor A.M. Ghatage, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune. As I have pointed out above, Pāṇini does not support the doubling of word-final consonants. However, a Vārttika cited in the KV on P.8.4.47 (अन- चि च) reads: अवसाने च यरो द्वे भवत इति वक्तव्यम्: “It should be stipulated that, before a pause, a consonant other than h is doubled.” The examples cited are: वाक्क्, वाक्, त्वक्क्, त्वक्, षट्ट्, षट्, तत्त्, तत्. These examples look very much like the ones cited by the CAB on the present rule. This Vārttika appears as अवसाने च in the MB on P.8.4.47, and, on this Vārttika, Patañjali rejects the necessity of making such a separate statement, but derives the same doctrine by reinterpreting P.8.4.47: तत्तर्हि वक्तव्यम् । न वक्तव्यम् । नायं प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधः - अचि नेति । किं तर्हि? पर्युदासोऽयम् - यदन्यदच इति. Patañjali says that the condition अनचि च does not mean: “the doubling does not occur, when followed by ac = a vowel,” but it means: “the doubling occurs, when followed by something other than a vowel.” This last phrase “something other than a vowel” is interpreted broadly to include consonants, as well as pause (avasāna). Kaiyaṭa disputes the correctness of this reading of the MB: पाठोऽयं लेखकप्रमादान्नष्टः - पर्युदासे ह्यच्सदृशस्य वर्णान्तरस्य निमित्तत्वेनोपादानादवसाने द्विर्वचनस्याप्रसङ्गात् । तस्मात् - नायं पर्यु- दासो यदन्यदच इति । किं तर्हि? प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधोऽचि न - इत्ययं पाठः । तत्र प्रसज्यप्रतिषेधे विधिरनुमीयते । अच उत्तरस्य यरो नूनं द्विर्वचनं सर्वत्रास्ति यतोऽचि प्रतिषिध्यते. However, he finally concludes: एवं चानैमित्तिकं द्विर्वचनमवसानेऽपि भवति : “Thus, the uncondi- tional doubling of a [final] consonant occurs even before a pause.” With all the confusion concerning the exact reading of the MB, this seems to be the inten- tion of Patañjali. I have a strong feeling that Pāṇini does not sanction such a doctrine, but it is sanctioned by Patañjali. The agreement of Patañjali’s doctrine with that of the present CA rule may perhaps indicate the eastern origin of the CA. It is possible that the diglossic gap between Sanskrit and Prakrit being

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 396 much wider in the east than in the west, some ‘protective’ modes of pronuncia- tion of final consonants developed specifically in the east. The other question which is left unclear by the present CA rule is whether the doubling of the word-final consonant takes place unconditionally, i.e. irrespective of what follows, or does it take place specifically before pause. The rule does not contain the word अवसाने, comparable to the Vārttika dis- cussed above. Whitney thinks as follows: “If the first rule of the second chapter (= CA 2.1.1: saṃhitāyām) is to be strictly applied, we must conclude that the makers of the Prātiśākhya recognized the duplicated methods of pronunciation as of force only in the saṃhitāpāṭha, and not in the utterance of the disjoined text, or the padapāṭha. This interpretation is somewhat supported by the fact that both the Rik Pr. (vi.3, r. 14, cccxc) and Pāṇini (viii.4.51) attribute to Śākala or Śākalya, the teacher to whom the invention of the padapāṭha is generally ascribed, a denial of all duplicated utterance.” This argument does not seem to be cogent. The next rule of the CA says: “The final ṅ, ṇ, and n, preceded by a short vowel, are doubled before a vowel.” Such a rule would not make sense if the previous rule were to pre- scribe unconditional doubling of a final vowel, irrespective of what followed. The best resolution of the confusion is to conclude that rule CA (3.2.2) applies under the condition of sandhi between two words, while the previous rule ap- plies before an avasāna ‘pause.’ Thus, the rule may apply to words, before pause, in the Padapāṭha, as well as in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. One can agree with Whitney that the present rule “is directly in contravention with the doctrine of the other treatises (R. Pr. vi.2, r. 7, ccclxxxiv; V.Pr. iv. 114; T. Pr. xiv. 15), which unanimously teach that a consonant is not duplicated in pausa.” How- ever, that need not deter us from accepting that the CA has a distinctive doc- trine of its own. The similarity of the CA view with the view given in the Vārttika (अवसाने च) on P.8.4.47 has been pointed out above. ३.२.२. ङणना ह्रस्वोपधाः स्वरे । Whitney (3.27). A, B, D, E, F, Hb, J, M, Nb: °धा स्वरे°. E, F: °ह्णस्वो°. A, B, D: ङणनां°. Most mss. read: र्ह for ह्र. Translation: The [word-final] ṅ, ṇ, and n, preceded by a short vowel, [are doubled] before an [initial] vowel [of the next word].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका397 Note: For the implication of this rule that the previous rule applies to final consonants before a pause, see the Note on CA 3.2.1. Whitney says: “Pāṇini and the Taitt. Pr. very properly treat this dou- bling of a final nasal as something apart from and unconnected with the phe- nomena of the varṇakrama, by teaching it in a different part of their texts from that which deals with the latter subject; and in the Rik Pr., also, the rule rather follows next after, than is introduced among, those which prescribe the other duplications.” This rule is distinct from other consonant doublings in being obligatory both in Vedic and the classical language, and Pāṇini explicitly calls this doubling nityam ‘obligatory,’ cf. P.8.3.32 (ङमो ह्रस्वादचि ङमुण्नित्यम्). Pro- cedurely, we may point out that Pāṇini teaches front-end augments to the word- initial vowels, rather than doubling of the word-final consonant. However, this is simply for system-internal reasons, which do not tolerate consonant clusters at the end of a pada, cf. P.8.2.23 (संयोगान्तस्य लोपः). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ङणनाः पदान्ता ह्रस्वोपधाः स्वरे परतः द्विर्भवन्ति । ‘प्रत्यङ्ङृणोति’ (not in AV)। ‘प्र॒त्यङ्ङुदे॑षि’ (अ.वे. १३.२.२०)। ‘उ॒द्यन्ना॑दि॒त्यः’ (अ.वे. २.३२.१)। ‘सुगण्णास्ते’ (not in AV)। ह्रस्वोपधा इति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒र्वाङ् आकू॑त्या चर’ (अ.वे. ३.२.३)। स्वर इति किमर्थम् । ‘उद॑ङ्जा॒तः’ (अ.वे. ५.४.८)। ‘ङणनास्तु पदान्ता ये ह्रस्वपूर्वाः स्वरोदयाः । तेषां द्विर्भावमिच्छन्ति प्रत्यङ्ङ् उद्यन्न् सुगण्ण् इति॥’ (source?) Note: The form r̥ṇoti is found in Nighaṇṭu (2.14), but it is not attested in any known Vedic text. The example सुगण्णास्ते is an artificial example. No instance of word-final ṇ is found in the AV text. The rule thus represents a phonetic generalization applicable to the general grammar of Sanskrit. This tendency is manifest here in the CA rule, in the CAB, as well as in the cited versified authority. The Pāṇinian commentators were also forced to offer the same kind of artificial examples, because in the natural usage of Sanskrit, we do not find word-final ṇ. See the KV on P.8.3.32 (ङमो ह्रस्वादचि ङमुण्नित्यम्). It is difficult to see the real need of including the treatment of word-final ṇ in this rule.

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 398 ३.२.३. संयोगादि स्वरात् । Whitney (3.28). Translation: The first consonant of a cluster is doubled after a vowel. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संयोगादि स्वरात्परतः द्विर्भवति । ‘अ॒ग्ग्निः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘वृ॒क्क्षः’ (अ.वे. ४.७.५)। [There is a lacuna in H, which resumes with CA 3.2.6. N continues:] ‘आत्रसति’ । ‘त्रसति’ । ‘आद्रवति’ ‘प्रद्रवति’ । अपर आह । स(N: सं)यमं । पूर्वस्येति । Note: The doubling prescribed by this rule is not exhibited by the manuscripts of either the AV or the CA. There is a similar passage in the CAB on CA (1.2.16): संयोगादि पूर्वस्य स्वरस्य भवति । अत्र सति (?)। आद्रवति (the only AV form, आद्रवत्, अ.वे.पै.सं. २.३१.२)। प्रद्रवति (no attested AV forms for प्र+द्रु)। अपर आह - हसयमं पूर्वस्येति (?)। Considering the context, the last segment of this passage probably reconstructs to: अपर आह - सयमं पूर्वस्येति । This could be interpreted to mean that a consonant, along with its yama, goes with the previ- ous vowel, in the context of syllabication. This could apply to an example like aggniḥ, especially if we interpret the sequence gg as a sequence of g followed by its yama, i.e. ग्ँ. Thus, while the initial consonant of a consonant cluster goes with the previous vowel, a consonant followed by its yama may go with the previous vowel, along with that yama. The rest of the passage probably reconstructs to: आत्तरसति । त्रसति । आद्द्रवति । प्रद्द्रवति. Here, three out of the four examples would show doubling of the initial consonant of a cluster after a vowel, while the example trasati shows the absence of such doubling, since the consonant cluster does not follow a vowel. The verb ā-!tras is not attested in Vedic literature, but trasantu is found in AV (5.21.8). The lone manuscript H, which Whitney used, has a number of missing rules. Now, with the second manuscript of the commentary, N, and the rest of the manuscripts of the CA, we are able to confidently fill the lacuna which dis- tressed Whitney a great deal.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका399 ३.२.४. छकारश्च । Whitney, H: no such rule. E, F, I, N, O: श्च, while other mss: स्य. Translation: The consonant ch [is doubled after a vowel]. Note: In an example like puccha cited by the commentary, one must assume pucha to be the original form. With the doubling taught by the present rule, we get puchcha, which is finally reduced to puccha with the deaspiration of the first ch taught by CA (1.4.3: सोष्मणि पूर्वस्यानूष्मा). Pāṇini achieves this same final outcome by prescribing an end-augment t (= tUK) to the vowel preceding ch. This t is then changed to c by other rules. While the CA rule has a wide obligatory coverage, Pāṇini’s rules note variation regarding this phenomenon, cf. P.6.1.73-76). One should especially note that Pāṇini makes this procedure optional (or preferred a la Kiparsky), when a word-final long vowel is followed by word-initial ch, cf. P.6.1.76 (पदान्ताद्वा). Also see the Notes on CA 2.1.17 for a further discussion on ch. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य

छकारश्च स्वरात्परतः द्विर्भवति

।

‘इच्छति’ । ‘यच्छति’ । ‘पुच्छं॒ वात॑स्य दे॒वस्य॑’ (अ.वे. ९.४.१३)। ‘न॒ड-मि॒वा च्छि॑न्द्धि’ (अ.वे. ४.१९.१)। ‘आ च्छि॑नद्मि॒ स्तुका॑-मिव’ (अ.वे. ७.७४.२)। Note: This rule and the commentary are missing in H, but are found in N, which was not available to Whitney. ३.२.५. पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात् । Whitney, H: no such rule. P: पिष्पल्यादिषु°. Translation: In [words] such as pippalī, [the consonant] after the first [vowel is doubled]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात् स्वरात् परतः द्विर्भवति । ‘पिप्पली’ (अ.वे. ६.१०९.१)। ‘पिप्पलम्’ (अ.वे. ९.१४.२०)। ‘पित्तम्’ (अ.वे. १.२४.१)। ‘चित्तम्’ (अ.वे. १.३४.२, probably ‘वित्तम्,’ अ.वे. १८.४.८९)।

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 400 ‘मिछं’(?)। ‘मज्जा’ (अ.वे. ४.१२.३)। ‘मज्जुः’ (?, probably ‘रज्जुः,’ अ.वे. ४.३.२)। Note: Whitney’s edition did not have either this rule or the commen- tary. However, in his “Collation of the Second Manuscript of the Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya” (1880, p. 161), Whitney says: “The second rule declares that ‘in pippali etc. there is duplication after the first vowel of the word.’ The cases here contemplated, judging from the word taken as example, are of a wholly different character from the others to which the rules of duplication relate, being such as have a double letter as part of their original and proper orthogra- phy. I do not, therefore, think it at all worth to look through the Atharvan text in order to pick out the other words which may have been included in the gaṇa.” One of the assumptions in the rule seems to be that the double conso- nant cannot be etymologically derived, but must be a surface level phonological rule. This suggests some interesting ideas about the possible intended ety- mologies for these words. Such intended etymological connections can be guessed for some words, e.g. pittam < !pā and cittam < !ci. The examples pippalī and pippalam seem to suggest that the author of the CA held the forms pipalī and pipalam to be more basic, cf. pīpal in Hindi. The forms majjā and majju were probably derived from maj+ā and maj+u respectively, and the consonants were doubled later on. The form majjuḥ, though unattested, may be possibly related to the form majjūka cited in the Nirukta (9.5), which is, according to the Roth-Böhtlingk dictionary, related to the word maṇḍūka. The most mysterious form is miccham. Even if one takes this as an error for piccham, this form would be covered by the previous rule, and there is no need to offer it here. A number of mss. of the AV offer the reading piṣpalī for pippalī. It is not clear whether pippalī is a Prakritization of piṣpalī, or whether piṣpalī is a hyper-correction for pippalī. See: Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., pp. 359-360). As for cittam, one may perhaps also refer to the occurrence of this word in AV (18.4.14). Referring to the mss. variants, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 876) points out: “The mss. vary in a between citám and cittám; our text reads the latter; SPP’s the former, which is doubtless correct, and which is implied by the translation.” It is an undeniable possibility that the CAB knew the reading cittám, and yet it felt that the word must be derived by doubling the consonant of an original citám, which alone fits the context, as correctly guessed by Whitney. Also see the same problem in AV (18.4.37), cf. AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 881.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका401 A perusal of the APR helps clear a good deal of confusion regarding the citations given under this rule. Rules APR (106-111a, pp. 76-77) deal with words containing the geminates yy (106), jj (107), ll (108), pp (109), tt (110), and nn (111a). APR (107) deals with the words majjā (AV 4.12.3) and rajjuḥ (AV 4.3.2). APR (109) deals with pippalī (AV 6.109.1), pippalaṃ (AV 9.9.20), and pippalyaḥ (AV 6.109.2). APR (110) deals with pittam (AV 1.24. 1; 18.3.5) and vittam (AV 18.4.89). In all likelihood, the present CA rule refers to the same collection of instances. The main difference between the CA and the APR seems to be that while the CA speaks of doubling, suggesting some prior stage of derivation without such doubling, the APR simply represents an enumeration of instances with specific geminated consonants. It may also be noted that the manuscript Vn for the APR records the reading cittam, where other manuscripts read vittam. The pippalyādi gaṇa and the doubling of consonants in the words listed in this gaṇa is referred to in a verse cited in the CAB on CA (1.1.12). ३.२.६. न विसर्जनीयः । Whitney (3.29). H omits न. Whitney suspects the presence of न, and this conjecture is supported by the manuscripts. Translation: A visarjanīya, i.e. ḥ, is not doubled. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न विसर्जनीयस्य द्विर्भवति । ‘अ॒ग्निः’ (अ.वे. १.७.४)। ‘वृ॒क्षः’ (अ.वे. ४.७.५)। ३.२.७. सस्थाने च । Whitney (3.30). Translation: [A consonant], when followed by another con- sonant with the same point of articulation, [is not doubled]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सस्थाने न च द्विर्भवति । ‘इन्द्रः॑’ (अ.वे. १.९.१)। ‘च॒न्द्रः’ (अ.वे. २.१५.३)। ‘म॒न्द्रः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३०)। ‘उष्ट्रः’ (not in AV)। ‘क्रोष्ट्रः’

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 402 (‘क्रो॒ष्ट्रे,’ अ.वे. ११.२.२)। ‘भ्राष्ट्रम्’ (not in AV)। ‘नेष्ट्रम्’ (not in AV)। ‘रा॒ष्ट्रम्’ (अ.वे. ३.४.१)। Note: The examples indraḥ, candraḥ, uṣṭraḥ, rāṣṭram, and bhrāṣṭram are cited by the KV on P.8.4.50 (त्रिप्रभृतिषु शाकटायनस्य). Śākaṭāyana held that there was no doubling of consonants involved in triple clusters. There seems to be a close relationship between the CAB and the Pāṇinian commentaries. Other treatises offer similar rules, but there are differences. For details, see: Whitney (1862: 142), and Deshpande (1975: 208). Whitney further observes: “The instances are wanting in variety, as il- lustrating our text, since they all present groups of three consonants, while we must suppose our rule to apply no less to groups of two, and to forbid duplica- tion in such words as antaḥ, asti, aṣṭa, etc.” ३.२.८. रेफहकारौ परं ताभ्याम् । Whitney (3.31). A, B: °लोताभ्यां. P(orig): हफहकारौ°. Translation: R and h, [at the beginning of a cluster, are not doubled. However, the consonant] following those two [is doubled]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - रेफहकारौ संयोगादी न द्विर्भवतः(H, N: ति) । परं तु ताभ्यां द्विर्भवति । ‘अ॒र्क्कः’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.५)। ‘अर्च्चः’ (‘अर्च॑,’ अ.वे. २०.५१.१)। ‘वर्त्तः’ (as in ‘अ॒भी॒व॒र्तः,’ अ.वे. १.२९.३)। ‘भर्ग्गः॑’ (अ.वे. १९. ३७.१)। ‘प्राह्ण्णः’ (not in AV) । ‘पूर्वाह्ण्णः’ (not in AV, RV 10.34.11)। ‘अ॒प॒रा॒ह्ण्णः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.४६)। ‘अपह्म्म- लति’ (not in AV)। ‘विह्म्मलति’ (not in AV)। ‘अप- ह्न्नुते’ (not in AV)। ‘निह्न्नुते’ (not in AV)। ‘ब्रह्म्म॑’ (अ.वे. १.१९.४)। Note: Neither manuscript shows the doubling of consonants required by the rule. Also, compare the commentary on CA (1.2.18):

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका403 रेफहकारक्रमजं च पूर्वस्य स्वरस्य भवति । ‘अ॒र्कः’ (अ.वे. ४.१५.५)। ‘अर्थः’ (not in AV, Whitney’s emendation: ‘अर्च॑,’ अ.वे. २०.५१.१)। ‘गर्त्ते’ (not in AV, Whitney’s emendation: ‘वर्त:,’as in ‘अ॒भी॒व॒र्तः,’ अ.वे. १.२९.३)। ‘भग्नः’ (not in AV, Whitney’s emendation: ‘भर्गः॑,’ अ.वे. १९. ३७.१)। ‘प्राह्णः’ (not in AV)। ‘पूर्वाह्णः’ (not in AV)। ‘अ॒प॒रा॒ह्णः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.४६)। ‘अपब्रह्मलयति’ (Whitney’s emendation: ‘अप ह्मलयति’ (not in AV)। ‘विह्मलयति’ (not in AV)। ‘अपह्नुते’ (not in AV)। ‘विह्नुते’ (not in AV)। ‘ब्रह्म॑’ (अ.वे. १.१९.४)। The text of the commentary on CA (3.2.8) shows that Whitney’s emen- dations of the text of the commentary on CA (1.2.18) were mostly correct. Neither the manuscripts of the CA, nor those of the AV, show this doubling. The CAB does not explicitly continue the condition svarāt from CA (3.2.3), but that word must continue into this rule. This is clear from Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.2.18), and the near equivalence of this rule with P.8.4.46 (अचो रहाभ्यां द्वे), cf. Notes on CA (1.2.18). We say that this rule is a near equivalent of P.8.4.46, rather than identi- cal with it, because the two rules predict slightly different results in a few cases. Consider for instance a form like arhati. Here, in the cluster rh, the CA rule would require doubling of h, since it applies to all consonants coming after r or h. This would give us the form arhhati. Pāṇini’s rule 8.4.46, on the other hand, prescribes the doubling of yaR consonants. The abbreviation yaR refers to all consonants, except h, and, therefore, P.8.4.46, will not lead to the dou- bling of h in arhati. The doubling of h was not universally accepted by Sanskrit phoneticians, cf. Varma (1929: 114-115). ३.२.९. शषसाः स्वरे । Whitney (3.32). Translation: The consonants ś, ṣ, and s, [are not doubled], before a vowel. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शषसाः स्वरे परे न द्विर्भवन्ति । ‘कर्षति’ (‘कर्षेत्,’ अ.वे. १५.१३.१२)। ‘वर्षति’ (अ.वे. पै.सं. १५.२१.५, ‘वर्षन्ति’, अ.वे. ९.१.९)। ‘आदर्शः’ (?, ‘आ द॑र्शति,’ अ.वे. ५.२.७)। ‘अक्षतर्शः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘ततर्ष(H, N: र्शं)’ (not in Vedic

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 404 Saṃhitās)। ‘पु॒र॒ोडाश॑म्’ (अ.वे. १८.४.२)। स्वर इति किमर्थम् । ‘बाष्ष्पो(H: वाष्यो, N: बाष्पो, Whitney: वर्ष्ष्यो)- दकेन यजेत’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। Note: Surya Kanta says that the example वार्ष्योदकेन यजेत cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and he (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. Here, Whitney cites the example from the commentary as वर्ष्ष्योदकेन and not as वार्ष्यो- दकेन, as reported by Surya Kanta. Secondly, Whitney does not report the ac- tual reading in the mss. H: वष्योदकेन. Thirdly, the second manuscript of the commentary offers the reading: बाष्पोदकेन. None of the mss. provide the dou- bling of ṣ as required by the rule. Surya Kanta is claiming the possible Śaunakīya status for a ghost reading. However, the word वर्ष्याः is found in AV 19.2.1 referring to rain-water, and this makes the original reading वर्ष्योदकेन a likely reading. On this rule, Whitney points out that “the manuscripts of the AV., so far as known to me, do not, save in very infrequent and entirely sporadic cases, follow any of the rules of the varṇakrama proper, excepting the one which di- rects duplication after a r ; and even in this case, their practice is as irregular as that of the manuscripts of the later literature.” This rule is similar to P.8.4.49 (शरोऽचि). Compare the examples cited by the KV on this rule: कर्षति, वर्षति, आकर्षः, अक्षदर्शः । अचीति किम् । दर्श्श्यते ।. The first several examples of the CAB seem to have been taken over from the KV, and the copyists have probably garbled them up. ३.२.१०. प्रगृह्याश्च प्रकृत्या । Whitney (3.33). I, O: °ह्यश्च°. A, B, D: प्रगृह्यश्चेमाकृत्य. I: 10. O: °प्रकृत्याः. Translation: The pragr̥hya [vowels, as defined in CA (1.3. 11-19)] remain unaltered. Note: Regarding an anomalous case, Whitney observes: “The text offers a single case in which a final pragr̥hya vowel is combined with a fol- lowing initial: it is nr̥patī ’va (viii.4.6). The same passage is found in the Rig- Veda (vii.104.6), exhibiting the same anomalous sandhi. … That no reference

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका405 is made to the passage in our treatise is possibly to be taken as an indication that the true Atharvan reading is nr̥patī iva, as is actually given by E. and I.” The VVRI edition reads nr̥patī iva, and the Padapāṭha clearly supports this reading as a pragr̥hya: nr̥patī iveti nr̥patī ’iva. The VVRI edition also notes that a large number of manuscripts read nr̥patīva. The complicating factor with iva is that the tradition treats nr̥patī iva as a compound form. This instance is listed as nr̥patīva under APR (105, p. 76), though a late manuscript Vn records the reading nr̥patī iva. A few deviant instances such as maṇīva < maṇī+iva were known to Pāṇinian commentators, and an apocryphal Vārttika : मणीवादीनां प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः came up to deal with such exceptional cases. For a discussion of this statement, see: Kaiyaṭa’s Pradīpa on the MB on P.1.1.11. In any case, I tend to agree with Whitney’s guess that the original Atharvan reading was most probably nr̥patī iva, but, I suspect that under the influence of the RV tra- dition, it was unconsciously altered by the reciters to nr̥patīva. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रगृह्याश्च प्रकृत्या भवन्ति । ‘केन॒ पार्ष्णी॒ आ भृ॑ते’ । (पद ∀) ‘पार्ष्णी इति’ (अ.वे. १०.२. १)। ‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू उ॒भौ’ । (पद ∀) ‘इन्द्रवायू इति’ (अ.वे. ३.२०.६)। ‘उ॒भावि॑न्द्रा॒ग्नी आ भ॑रताम्’ । (पद ∀) ‘इन्द्राग्नी इति’ (अ.वे. ५.७.६)। ३.२.११. एना एहा आदयश्च । Whitney (3.34). D, Hb, J: एता for एना. I: 11. Translation: In passages like enā ehāḥ, [there is no sandhi of adjacent vowels]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एना एहा आदयश्च प्रकृत्या भवन्ति । ‘ए॒ना ए॒हाः परि॑’ (अ.वे. १२.३.३३)। ‘यथा॒ मन्नाप॑गा॒ असः॑’ (अ.वे. १.३४.५; २.३०.१; ६.८.१-३)। ‘पृ॒थि॒वी उ॒त द्यौः’ (अ.वे. १८.१.५)। Note: The CAB cites all the same examples in the same order as are found under APR (103). Whitney, however, points out additional cases which are not covered by the citations in the commentary, e.g. Whitney (AV Transl.

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 406 Vol.I., 459) refers to sádanā akarma in AV (7.97.4) as a case of hiatus, and says: “the irregular hiatus must be regarded as falling under Prāt. iii.34 (= CA 3.2.11), although the passage is not quoted by the commentary to that rule.” The example sadanā akarma (AV 7.97.4) raises further complicated questions. It is cited under APR (100, p. 71) as an example of an ekādeśa combination, where there may be doubt as to the original long vowels. All the examples cited under this rule show that a vowel combination has taken place, except the example sadanā akarma. My guess is that this example too must have been read as sadanākarma (< sadanā + akarma) by the person who in- cluded it in the APR list of ekādeśas, though it is clear that the meter requires it to be read as sadanā akarma. In any case, it is clear that it does not come under the present rule, or under APR (103). ३.२.१२. यवलोपे । Whitney (3.35). Translation: When the [final] y and v are dropped [by CA (2.1.21), the preceding vowel does not combine with the fol- lowing vowel]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यकारवकारलोपे च प्रकृत्या भवति । ‘क अा॑स॒ञ्जन्याः॒ के व॒राः’ (अ.वे. ११.८.१)। ‘उ॒ष्णेन॑ वाय उद॒केनेहि॑’ (अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अ॒स्या इ॒च्छन्न॒ग्रुवै॒ पति॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.६०.१)। ‘स उ॑ ए॒व म॑हाय॒मः’ (अ.वे. १३.४. ५)। ‘ता इ॒मा आपः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१५.७)। Note: The examples cited here by the CAB are identical with the ones cited under CA (2.1.21). Whitney, in his comments on the present rule, point to several anoma- lous cases. For example, AV (9.4.19) reads ब्राह्मणेभ्य ऋषभं दत्त्वा, while the meter requires the sandhi: ब्राह्मणेभ्यर्षभं दत्त्वा. On the other hand, on AV (10.1.15), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 564) says: “All the saṃhitā-mss. #or rather, most of them: see also note to Prāt. iii.35 (= CA 3.2.12)∃ combine kr̥tyé’ti #and thus indeed the meter requires us to pronounce∃; but our edition restores the more correct reading #kr̥tya íti∃, since the Prāt. does not counte- nance the irregularity; we should expect to find it with vandane’va (in ii.56 = CA 2.2.17).” The VVRI editions sticks to the manuscripts and keeps the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका407 reading kr̥tyeti. However, we must note that the exceptional behavior of kr̥tyeti is noticed neither by the CA, nor by the APR, and it makes one wonder whether the reading as known to these texts was the expected regular form kr̥tya iti < kr̥tye iti. ३.२.१३. केवल उकारः स्वरपूर्वः । Whitney (3.36). Hb, Nb: °उका स्वर°. O: °स्वरः पूर्वः. Translation: An u, when a word by itself, preceded by a vowel, [is not combined with the following vowel]. Note: For example, in स उ एव, AV (13.4.5), the combination of saḥ+u results in sa u, by the previous rule. The present rule makes the u in such combinations immune from combinations with the following vowels. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - केवल उकारः स्वरपूर्वः प्रकृत्या भवति। ‘स उ॑ ए॒व म॑हाय॒मः’ (अ.वे. १३.४.५)। ‘स उ॒ अश्मा॑नमस्यति’ (अ.वे. १३.४.४१)। . ३.२.१४. नमौ सन्ध्यौ । Whitney (3.37). J.K: न समौ सन्ध्यौ. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary in K at- tempts to justify this reading. Translation: The sounds n and m, resulting from euphonic combinations, [remain unchanged]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नकारमकारौ च सन्ध्यौ प्रकृत्या भवतः(H, N: ति)। ‘नदीन्तरति(H, N: नंदी°)’ । ‘त्रिष्टुम्न- (H, N: न्न)यति’ । Note: The second example is found in the KV on P.8.4.45 (यरोऽनु- नासिकेऽनुनासिको वा). Besides pointing out that the examples offered by the commentator are fabricated examples, Whitney informs: “The former is intended to show that a n which is the result of the assimilation of a final m, by ii. 31 (= CA 2.1.31), before an initial t, is not liable to a farther insertion of a sibilant before that t, by

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 408 ii. 26 (= CA 2.1.26); the latter, that a m which grows out of the assimilation of a final labial to a following initial dental, by ii. 5 (= CA 2.1.5), is not then, by ii. 31 (= CA 2.1.31), convertible into n by a second assimilation.” Whitney also makes an important observation: “This rule … is replaced, or rendered unnecessary, in the other treatises, by the general precepts there referred to.” For example, in the Pāṇinian system P.8.4.45 (यरोऽनुनासिकेऽनु- नासिको वा) converts a final labial stop to m before a nasal. A final m is con- verted to an anusvāra by P.8.3.23 (मोऽनुस्वारः), and then the anusvāra is con- verted to a homorganic nasal before a non-spirant consonant by P.8.4.58 (अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः). Now, the rule P.8.2.1 (पूर्वत्रासिद्धम्) institutes a con- vention by which, in the following sections of the Aṣṭādhyāyī, a given rule does not recognize the outputs of the following rules, but recognizes the out- puts of the preceding rules. Thus, in the example triṣṭumnayati < triṣṭup+ nayati, P.8.3.23 (मोऽनुस्वारः) does not recognize the change of p > m brought about by P.8.4.45 (यरोऽनुनासिकेऽनुनासिको वा), and hence it does not convert this m into an anusvāra. In the absence of an anusvāra, P.8.4.58 (अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः) does not operate with respect to our example. This is how the form *triṣṭunnayati is prevented in the Pāṇinian system. ३.२.१५. आकारः केवलः प्रथमं पूर्वेण । Whitney (3.38). A, B: °प्रथमः°. P adds a daṇḍa after केवलः. Translation: The sound ā, [forming a separate word] by it- self, is first [combined] with the preceding vowel, [and then with the following vowel]. Note: Different systems of grammar followed different strategies. For example, Pāṇini assumes that the combination of ā with the following form takes place first, e.g. dhiyā+ā+ihi > dhiyā+ehi. However, after this has been done, the combination of dhiyā+ehi must exceptionally provide dhiyehi, rather than the normal expected result dhiyaihi. To achieve this exceptional result, he composed a special rule: P.6.1.95 (ओमाङोश्च). The KV notes that this is an exception to the normal vr̥ddhi rule, P.6.1.88 (वृद्धिरेचि): वृद्धिरेचीत्यस्यापवादः. The present CA rule, like RPR 2.7: आनुपूर्व्येण सन्धीन्, achieves the same result with a different procedure. First we combine dhiyā+ā > dhiyā, and then we combine dhiyā+ihi to derive the expected dhiyehi. This is achieved by stipulating the order of combinations. One may infer from this that the normal order of these combinations, without the present exception-rule, might have been the other way around. Whitney seems to draw a reverse conclusion: “The latter is the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका409 true method of making the two successive sandhis, as we are taught by this rule, and by corresponding rules in the other treatises; which, however, express themselves in a more general manner, declaring that all sandhis must be made in the order of their occurrence.” The reason why the linear order of sandhis may not have been looked at as the necessary order is that a relationship between a preverb and a verb is viewed as a more ‘interior’ relationship, in comparison with the relationship of the preverb with a non-verb item. In most of the examples cited by the commentator, the ā is followed by a verb form. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आकारः केवलः प्रथमं पूर्वेण स्वरेण सन्धीयते । ‘धि॒येहि॑’ (पद ∀ ‘धि॒या । आ । इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘जुष॒स्वेन्द्र॑’ (पद ∀ ‘जु॒ष॒स्व॒ । आ । इ॒न्द्र॒,’ अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘स्तनयि॒त्नुनेहि॑’ (पद ∀ ‘स्तनयित्नुना॑ । आ । इ॒हि॒’, अ.वे. ४.१५.११)। ‘कुष्ठेहि॑’ (पद ∀ ‘कुष्ठ॑ । आ। इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. ५.४.१)। ‘उद॒केनेहि॑’ (पद ∀ ‘उ॒द॒केन॑ । आ। इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अव॑ पश्य॒तेत॑’ (पद ∀ ‘अव॑ । प॒श्य॒त॒ । आ । इ॒त॒,’ अ.वे. १८.४.३७)। Note: All the examples cited by the CAB are cited in the same order under APR (8), which also cites the present CA rule. One may also note that the APR sorts its examples into two categories, those where the ā is followed by i, and those where the ā is followed by e. The first is dealt with by APR (8), while the second is dealt with by APR (9). In the cases listed under APR (9), the order of sandhis does not seem to really make any difference, e.g. ihaitu < iha+ā+etu, AV (1.15.2). On dhiyéhi (AV 2.5.4), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 44) says: “The first half-verse is vs. 5 in AŚS., where it reads: … dhiyā hiyānaḥ. Of the two versions of the last pāda, that of AŚS. is doubtless the original, though ours (the pada has dhiyā́ ā́ ihi ā́ naḥ) is ingenious enough to give a fair sense; the reading dhiyéhi is authenticated by the Prāt. comment, which quotes it more than once (to iii.38 = CA 3.2.15; iv. 113-115 = CA 4.4.14-16).” Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 564) points to another example which is subject to this rule, though the pada-text does not clearly indicate it in this fashion: “The pada-mss. have in b upa-eyimá, and the combination to upeyimá falls under the rule Prāt. iii.38, although the ā contained in eyimá (= ā-īyimá) does not appear as ā in the pada-text.” Since, in this case, the finite verb is ac-

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 410 cented, the unaccented upasargas are compounded with the verb by CA (4.1. 23: उपसर्ग आख्यातेनोदात्तेन समस्यते), and with two upasargas involved in this compound, only the first juncture is separated with an avagraha in the pada- text. ३.२.१६. स्वरे नामिनोऽन्तस्थाः । Whitney (3.39): °न्तःस्थाः. No manuscript supports Whitney. A, B: °मिनांतस्थाः. Translation: Before a vowel, the nāmins, i.e. vowels other than a and ā, are changed to [appropriate] semi-vowels. Note: The rule as stated is indeed too broad, and its domain is brought down to its proper size by the subsequent exception rules which fol- low. Finally, its actual scope is limited to the vowels i, u, r̥, (and theoretically l̥) changing respectively to y, v, r, (and l), before dissimilar vowels. The choice of appropriate substitutes is governed by CA (1.4.4: आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः). The CAB on CA (1.4.4) specifically refers to the present rule as a case for the application of CA (1.4.4) which says that the choice of a substitute is determined in terms of maximal featural proximity to the original sound. Also: Hueckstedt (1995). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरे परतः नामिनः अन्तस्था भवन्ति। ‘दध्यत्र’ । ‘मध्वत्र’ । ‘मात्रर्थम्’ । ‘पित्र(H, N: तृ)र्थम्’ । Note: As Whitney rightly observes, these examples are fabricated ex- amples and are identical with those found in the commentaries on Pāṇini’s rule 6.1.77 (इको यणचि). This fact may perhaps allow us to set the upper limit for the date of this commentary, if we can date the first appearance of these exam- ples in Pāṇinian commentaries. At the very least, it is quite clear that the com- mentator is substantially under the influence of the Pāṇinian tradition, though, unlike the other two commentaries, he does not directly cite Pāṇini’s rule. Interestingly, Surya Kanta selectively omits these examples from his claim that such unattested examples belong to the so-called genuine Śaunakīya recension. ३.२.१७. सन्ध्यक्षराणामयवायावः । Whitney (3.40). M, Na: °यवः.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका411 Translation: The diphthongs [i.e. e, o, ai, and au, before vowels, are respectively, replaced by] ay, av, āy, and āv. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सन्ध्यक्षराणां स्वरे परतः अयवायावो भवन्ति । ‘अग्न आसाम्’ (?)। ‘वाय आसाम्’ (?)। ‘अग्न ऊतये’ (?)। ‘वा॒य॒ ऊ॒तये॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.६)। ‘अस्मा उद्धर’ (?)। ‘अ॒सावा॑दि॒त्यः’ (अ.वे. १५.१०.७)। ‘च(H, N: श्व)यनम्’ । ‘चा(H, N: वा)यकः’ । ‘लवनम्’ । ‘लाव- (H, N: य)कः’ । ‘पव(H:, N: च)नम्’ । ‘पाव(H, N: च)- कः’ । Note: The first several examples, which are examples of external sandhis, do not show the y or v of ay, av, āy, and āv, but show the stage of their deletion by CA (2.1.21-22), and the remaining vowels are immune from combination with the following vowels by CA (3.2.12). The examples cayanam, lavanam, cāyakaḥ, lāvakaḥ and pāvakaḥ are stock examples in the Pāṇinian tradition right from Patañjali’s MB. Also see the KV on P.6.1.78 (एचोऽयवायावः). Again, as Whitney notes, the commentator prefers to give stock examples from the Pāṇinian tradition, rather than real ex- amples from the text of the AV. However, Whitney correctly notes that these last “are examples of applications of the rule which the Prātiśākhya does not contemplate.” These last examples illustrate the present rule in the situation of internal sandhi. ३.२.१८. पूर्वपरयोरेकः । Whitney (3.41). Translation: The preceding and the following [vowels are combined into] a single [substitute, in the following operations]. Note: Whitney comments: “The technical language of the Prāti- śākhyas has no recognized method of indicating the fusion of two sounds into one, and the form of the following rules is ambiguous, since rule 44 (= CA 3.2.21), for instance, literally means, according to the phraseology of the trea- tise, that a before i becomes e, and not a with i. Hence the necessity of this special rule of interpretation.” One may add that Pāṇini is not different from

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 412 the Prātiśākhyas in this respect, cf. P.6.1.84 (एकः पूर्वपरयोः) and the following rules. Also curious is the inversion of the word-order in the statement of the rule, as compared to Pāṇini 6.1.84. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वपरयोरेको भवति । एतदधिकृतं वेदितव्यम् । इत उत्तरं यदनुक्रमिष्यामः । ३.२.१९. समानाक्षरस्य सवर्णे दीर्घः । Whitney (3.42). Hc, Nc: सामान्याक्षरस्य°. Translation: A simple vowel, followed by a member of the same varṇa group, becomes long. Note: The wording of this rule is very similar to Pāṇini’s rule 6.1.101 (अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः). However, the main difference lies in the fact that while Pāṇini 1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्) explicitly defines the term savarṇa as referring to a sound sharing the same point of articulation and the manner as the sound in question, the CA does not define the term savarṇa. In the CA, this term oc- curs only once. The CAB on CA (1.1.27) quotes an ancient Śikṣā verse which defines the term savarṇa as: समानास्यप्रयत्ना ये ते सवर्णा इति स्मृताः, which closely parallels P.1.1.9. However, a closer study of the CA shows that the CA seems to be using the term in a more basic meaning, i.e. member of the same varṇa, e.g. i and ī are members of the same varṇa, and are hence represented by the term ivarṇa. For an extensive study of the different notions of savarṇa, see: Deshpande (1975: 91-93). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समाना(H, N: सामान्या°)क्षरस्य सवर्णे परतः दीर्घो भवति । ‘दण्डाग्रम्’ । ‘दधीन्द्रः’ । ‘मधूष्णम्’ । ‘होतॄश्यः’ । ‘पितॄश्यः’ । Note: Notice that Surya Kanta has conveniently made no claim for the cited examples as belonging to his so-called genuine Śaunakīya recension. The KV on P.6.1.101 (अकः सवर्णे दीर्घः) cites the examples daṇḍāgram, dadhīn- draḥ, madhūdake, and hotr̥̄śyaḥ. The Osmania edition of the KV notes a manuscript variant madhūṣṭram for madhūdake. This variant is probably a cor- ruption of madhūṣṇam. Also noteworthy is the absence of an example of -l̥+l̥-.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका413 This is natural for the CA since one does not have any words ending in l̥, and this fact has been explicitly stated in CA (1.1.6: अन्ऌकारः स्वरः पद्यः). ३.२.२०. सीमन्ते ह्रस्वः । Whitney (3.43). Hb, Nb: सीमंतर्हस्वः. Most mss. read र्ह for ह्र. Translation: In sīmanta [< sīma+anta, the combination re- sulting from a+a] is a short [a]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सीमन्ते ह्रस्वो भवति । ‘जि॒न॒तो व॑ज्र॒ त्वं सी॒मन्त॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.१३४.३)। सीमन्ते केशवेष्टेति वक्तव्यम् । यो हि सीम्नो अन्तः सीमान्तः सः । Note: Whitney argues that the theme here is sīmant and not sīmanta. He however acknowledges that the rule seems to presuppose a derivation as sīmanta coming from sīma+anta. Whitney notes that the Padapāṭha does not analyze this word into its components. The APR (p. 137) lists sīmanta in the samudrādi gaṇa, a list of words which are not analyzed because of unclear components and unclear combinations. However, as in other cases, the CA rule marks an effort to move the grammatical analysis of words beyond the stage of the Padapāṭha. The CA and the CAB are indeed not alone in deriving sīmanta from sīma(n)+anta. On P.6.1.94 (एङि पररूपम्), Kātyāyana offers a Vārttika: शकन्ध्वादिषु च. This list begins with the word śakandhu < śaka+andhu, where the combination of a+a results in a, rather than ā. One of the additional examples on this Vārttika of- fered by Patañjali is sīmanta, which he explicitly analyzes as sīma+antaḥ. Then Patañjali says: केशेष्विति वक्तव्यम् । यो हि सीम्नोऽन्तः, सीमान्तः स भवति. The pas- sage in the CAB reminds one of the MB passage. I wonder whether the read- ing केशवेष्टेति is a garbled form for the original केशेष्विति . ३.२.२१. अवर्णस्येवर्ण एकारः । Whitney (3.44). J, M (corr), P: °स्येववर्ण°. Translation: A member of the a-varṇa [i.e. a, ā etc.] followed by a member of the i-varṇa [i.e. i, ī etc.] is replaced with e.

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 414 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवर्णस्य इवर्णे परतः एकारो भवति। ‘खट्वेन्द्रः’ । ‘मालेन्द्रः’ । Note: The manuscript H reads: ravadgomālendraḥ, and by comparing this with examples under Pāṇini (vi.1.87), Whitney restored this to khaṭven- draḥ, mālendraḥ. These examples are also found in the KV on P.6.1.84 (एकः पूर्वपरयोः), and in the MB on P.6.1.87 (आद्गुणः). This restoration is now clearly supported by the second manuscript, N. ३.२.२२. उवर्ण ओकारः । Whitney (3.45). A, B, D, Hb: °उकारः for °ओकारः. Translation: [A member of the a-varṇa, i.e. a, ā etc.] fol- lowed by a member of the u-varṇa [i.e. u, ū etc.] is replaced with o. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवर्णस्य उवर्णे परतः ओ(H: ॐ)- कारो भवति। ‘खट्वोदकम्’ । ‘मालोदकम्’ । Note: The example khaṭvodakam is found in the KV on P.6.1.87 (ād guṇaḥ). Both of these examples are found in the MB on P.6.1.87. Commenting on an anomalous form, Whitney says: “There is a single instance in the text, in which this rule is not observed, and a+ū ar not combined into o, but into au : it is the word prauḍhaḥ (xv.15.4 : p. pra-ūḍhaḥ). B., in- deed, reads proḍho, but doubtless only by an error of the copyist. We must suppose, either that the authors and commentator overlooked this word, or that its pada as well as saṃhitā reading in their text would be prauḍhaḥ, or that the passage containing it was not in their Atharva-Veda - of which suppositions, I should regard the first as the most plausible, and the last as the least likely.” The VVRI edition finds one more manuscript, O, which shares the reading proḍho, but the edition chooses the majority reading prauḍhaḥ. Pāṇini is probably familiar with the form proḍha, as it appears in the gaṇa mentioned in P.2.1.17 (तिष्ठद्गुप्रभृतीनि च). [Of course one cannot be totally certain if all the words in such lists go back to Pāṇini.] The formation prauḍhaḥ is not provided for by Pāṇini, but is provided for by Kātyāyana’s Vārttika : प्रादूहोढोढ्येषैष्येषु on P.6.1.89 (एत्येधत्यूठ्सु). It is also interesting to find that Kaiyaṭa on this Vārttika still attempts to derive the expression प्रोढा

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका415 प्र+आ+ऊढा प्रोढाशब्दे आ+ऊढा ओढा, प्र+ओढा इति स्थिते ‘ओमाङोश्च’ इति पररूपं भवति, MB, (MLBD edn, Vol. II., p. 745). It is thus possible that the oldest reading was indeed proḍha, which was gradually supplanted by prauḍha, and under the pressure of the post-Kātyāyana Pāṇinian tradition, the Atharvan re- citers almost completely replaced an older proḍha with a later form prauḍha. Such a speculation is further supported by the fact that the APR also makes no effort to account for an anomalous prauḍha. ३.२.२३. अरमृवर्णे । Whitney (3.46). Translation: [A member of the a-varṇa, i.e. a, ā etc.] fol- lowed by a member of the r̥-varṇa [i.e. r̥, r̥̄ etc.] is replaced with ar. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अरम् भवति अवर्णस्य ऋवर्णे परतः । ‘तस्य॑र्ष॒भस्याङ्गा॑नि’ (अ.वे. ९.४.११)। ‘अव॑र्तिः’ (अ.वे. ४.३४.३)। ‘य॒ज्ञर्तः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.१०.४)। ‘काम(H, N: मा)र्तः’ (not in AV)। ‘नैना॒नव॑र्तिः’ (अ.वे. ४.३४.३)। Note: Whitney’s AV text for 9.4.11 reads: तस्य॑ ऋष॒भस्याङ्गा॑नि । Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 530) points out: “All our mss. (save O.) read, like the edition, tásya r̥ṣa- in c, although the passage is quoted as example under the Prāt. rule (iii.46 = CA 3.2.23) that a and ā+r̥ make ar.” The same reading is maintained by SPP and VVRI editions. One wonders whether this is a case of the influence of the Pāṇinian grammar on the text-tradition of the AV, cf. P.6.1.128 (r̥ty akaḥ). It is also clear from the context that the instance must be kāmartaḥ < kāma+r̥taḥ, and not kāmārtaḥ < kāma+ārtaḥ as cited by the manuscripts. There is some disagreement concerning the interpretation of the word ávartiḥ in AV (4.34.3). Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 206) says: “The pada-text writes ávartiḥ without division, yet the comment to Prāt. iii.46 (= CA 3.2.23) quotes the word as exemplifying the combination of final a and initial r̥; the comm. understands and explains it as a-vartti!” On this rule, Whitney has extensive comments on the practice of the manuscripts of the AV, and the phonetic implications of that practice: “They follow a method of their own, in which is to be recognized the influence of a doctrine agreeing with or resembling that of our Prātiśākhya respecting the

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 416 svarabhakti, or figment of vowel sound, assumed to be thrust in between r and a following consonant (see i.101, 102 = CA 1.4.10-11). Where the phonetical theory requires the insertion of the longer svarabhakti, or where a sibilant fol- lows, there the manuscripts usually and regularly give the vowel r̥ instead of r, reading iva r̥ṣabhaḥ (iii.6.4), svasa r̥ṣīṇām (vi.133.4), etc.; before any other consonant, or where our treatise and the Rik. Pr. interpose the shorter svara- bhakti after the r, and the other Prātiśākhyas require no insertion at all, there our manuscripts regularly make the combination according to the rule now under discussion, writing r̥tasya rtena (vi.114.1), iva rbhuḥ (x.1.8), sa rcām (x.8.10), etc. These rules are not, however, altogether without exceptions.” ३.२.२४. उपर्षन्त्यादिषु च । Whitney (3.47). Ha, Na: omit च. J, M: उपरिषन्त्या°. P: उपरिषांत्या°. Translation: [The final a of an upasarga combines with the initial r̥ of the verb to yield ar] also in forms like uparṣanti. Note: This rule is an exception to the next rule, i.e. CA (3.2.25) which predicts the result ār in a combination of a final a of an upasarga and the initial r̥ of a verb. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपर्षन्त्यादिषु च अरं भवति अवर्णस्य ऋवर्णे परतः । ‘या हृद॑यमुप॒र्षन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. ९.८.१४)। ‘याः पा॒र्श्वे उ॑प॒र्षन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. ९.८.१५)। ‘यास्ति॒रश्ची॑रुप॒- र्षन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. ९.८.१६)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 43) points out that the APR (13), examples 34-36, indicate a reading upariṣánti, rather than uparṣánti as expected by CA (3.2.24). He concludes from this that the Vulgate, which follows the APR, is not a Śaunakīya text, and that a genuine Śaunakīya text had the reading as expected by the CA. As I have shown above, the mss. J and M read upariṣantyādiṣu, and would lead one to believe that the same tradi- tion which copied and maintained knowledge of the CA was perhaps conver- sant with the different reading, and that reading shows up even though it con- tradicts the very rule of the CA. Such a situation would indicate a change within a tradition, rather that the existence of two entirely separate and unre- lated traditions. The variation in the mss. of the AV noted by both Whitney

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका417 and Surya Kanta may also indicate the same situation, i.e. that some manu- scripts represent a more conservative reading, while others represent a latter- day changed pronunciation. Both Whitney (on CA 3.2.24 = W: 3.47) and the VVRI editions note the existence of the manuscript variation of the readings: uparṣanti, upa r̥ṣanti, and upariṣanti. ३.२.२५. उपसर्गस्य धात्वादावारम् । Whitney (3.48). A, B, D, J, P: उपसर्गधात्वादाचारं. Translation: [The final a or ā] of an upasarga is replaced with ār, before verb-initial [r̥ or r̥̄]. Note: Strictly speaking, the rule refers to avarṇa at the end of an upasarga and r̥varṇa at the beginning of the verb-form. The word avarṇasya continues from CA (3.2.21) and r̥varṇe from CA (3.2.23). Thus, in theory, the rule refers to classes of a-vowels and r̥-vowels, irrespective of the length of the instances. However, the CAB speaks of r̥kārādau, restricting the rule to verb- initial short r̥. This is done probably for two reasons. In practice, we do not have verb-initial r̥̄. Secondly, Pāṇini’s rule 6.1.91 (उपसर्गादृति धातौ) which deals with the same phenomenon also refers to short r̥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्गस्य अवर्णान्तस्य ऋकारादौ परतः धातौ आरं भवति । ‘उपार्षति’ । ‘प्रार्षति’ । ‘उपा- र्च्छति’ । ‘प्रार्च्छति’ । ‘उपार्ध्नोति’ । ‘प्रार्ध्नोति’ । Note: The examples upārcchati, prārcchati, and upārdhnoti are found in the KV on P.6.1.91 (उपसर्गादृति धातौ). None of the instances cited by the commentator are attested in the AV. Whitney says: “The only case arising under the rule in the Atharva-Veda is ārcchatu, at ii.12.5. Our treatise might, then, like the Vāj. Pr. (iv. 57), have re- stricted the operation of the rule to the preposition ā. The Taitt. Pr. (x.9) states the principle in the same general form in which it is given here.” This is clearly an instance of the CA moving closer to the format of a generic grammar of Sanskrit. ३.२.२६. भूतकरणस्य च । Whitney (3.49).

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 418 Translation: Also, the [a] of the past-tense marker, [before the verb-initial r̥, is replaced with ār]. Note: Whitney remarks: “This rule, of course, in a treatise whose subject is the sandhyapadyau guṇau of words (i.1 = CA 1.1.2), is out of place and superfluous.” The rule, like many others of this kind, represents an inter- est on the part of Prātiśākhya authors to occasionally move in the direction of a generic grammar of Sanskrit, cf. P.6.1.90 (आटश्च). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - भूतकरणस्य च अवर्णान्तस्य ऋका- रादौ परतः धातोश्चारं भवति । ‘स अा॑र्ध्नोत्’ (अ.वे. ४.३९. १)। भूतकरणस्येति किमर्थम् । ‘क॒त॒मा सर्चाम्’ (अ.वे. १०.८.१०)। Note: Whitney’s AV text for 10.8.10 reads: क॒त॒मा स ऋ॒चाम् । The example ārdhnot is found in the KV on P.6.1.90 (आटश्च). ३.२.२७. एकारैकारयोरैकारः । Whitney (3.50). Ha, Na: एकारैकारयोरैकः. O: एकारैकारयोरिकारः. Translation: [Word-final a and ā], combined with [word- initial] e and ai, are replaced with ai. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकारैकारयोः ऐकारो भवति । ‘खट्वै- रगाः’ (Whitney: °का) । ‘मालैरगाः’ (Whitney: °काः)। ‘खट्वैति(H: भि)कायनः(H, N: °मानस)ः’(Whitney: खट्वैति- कायनः)। मालैतिकाय(H, N add: मा)नः । Note: The examples khaṭvaiḍakā and khaṭvaitikāyanaḥ are found in the KV on P.6.1.88 (वृद्धिरेचि). The fact that the text of the commentary has khaṭvairagā instead of khaṭvaiḍakā, may mean that either the author of the CAB, oearly copyist, was from a western regions like Rajasthan. For the interchange of ḍ and r, and k and g, in Rajasthani dialects of medieval times, see: Ernest Bender (1992: 90-91). Such a possibility is strengthened by

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका419 the fact that most of the manuscripts of the CA are found in Rajasthan and Gujarat. Also see the Note on CA 2.1.12 for another similar case. ३.२.२८. ओकारौकारयोरौकारः । Whitney (3.51). A, D: ओकारो°. O: ओकारौकायोरौकारः. Translation: [Word-final a and ā], combined with [word- initial] o and au, are replaced with au. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ओकारौकारयोः औकारो भवति । ब्र॑ह्मौद॒नं प॑चति (अ.वे. ११.१.१)। तस्याै॑द॒नस्य (अ.वे. ११.३.१)। ब्रह्मौपगवः (not in AV)। Note: The examples brahmaudanaḥ and brahmaupagavaḥ are cited in the KV on P.6.1.88 (वृद्धिरेचि). ३.२.२९. शकल्येष्यादिषु पररूपम् । Whitney (3.52). A, B: वाकल्ये°. M, N: °शादिषु°. K: शाकल्येष्वादिषु°. Translation: In sequences such as śakalyeṣi, [the final vowel of the preceding word combined with the initial of the follow- ing] is replaced with the following [initial] sound. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शकल्येष्यादिषु पररूपं भवति । ‘श॒क॒ल्ये॒षि यदि॑ वा ते ज॒नित्र॑म्’ (पद ∀ ‘श॒क॒ल्य॒ऽए॒षि,’ अ.वे. १.२५.२)। ‘अनमी॒वा उ॒पेत॑न’ (पद ∀ ‘उ॒प॒ऽएत॑न,’ अ.वे. ३.१४.३)। ‘अ॒र्वाची॒ गौरुपे॑षतु’ (पद ∀ ‘उप॑ । ए॒ष॒तु॒,’ अ.वे. ६.६७.३)। ‘उ॒पेष॑न्तमुदु॒म्बल॑म्’ (पद ∀ ‘उ॒प॒ऽएष॑न्तम्,’ अ.वे. ८.६.१७)। Note: Whitney remarks: “Of these cases (cited by the CAB), the first would equally admit of being regarded as a case of regular sandhi, and ana- lyzed as śakali-eṣi : the second is analogous with the combinations to which rule 38 of this chapter (= CA 3.2.15) relates, the preposition ā being in saṃhitā combined with upa, and then the resulting upā with itana. Of this kind, the text

अध्याय ३, पाद २ 420 presents one additional instance, in upeyima (x.1.10: p. upa-eyima; it is made up of upa-ā-īyima) : it is the only passage falling under the rule which the commentator does not give.” Whitney’s comments given above may be tempered down in view of the fact that the CAB cites all the same examples which are listed under APR (62) and the CA rule is identical in wording with APR (62). This shows that the traditional understandings of these form were quite different from what Whitney proposed for them. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 25) points out: “The pada-reading śakalya-eṣi in b is assured by Prāt. iii.52, but the meaning is extremely obscure. Ppp. has the better reading śākalyeṣu ‘among the shavings’; janitram rather re- quires a locative. The comm. guesses it as loc. of śakalyeṣ, from śakalya ex- plained as a ‘heap of shavings,’ and root iṣ ‘seek,’ and so an epithet of fire; BR. conjecture ‘following the shaving, i.e. glimmering.’” ३.२.३०. एकारौकारान्तात्पूर्वः पदादेरकारस्य । Whitney (3.53). E, F, Hb, I, Nb, O: °पूर्वपदादे°. Translation: After final e and o, the word-initial a [ becomes one] with the preceding [vowel]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकारौकारान्तात्पूर्वो भवति । पदादेः अकारस्य। ‘ते॑ऽवदन्’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.१)। ‘तेऽब्रु(H: क्र)वन्’ (तै.सं. २.५.१.३)। ‘सो॑ऽब्रवीत्’ (अ.वे. १५.३. २)। ‘यो॑ऽस्य॒ दक्षि॑णः॒ कर्णः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१८.३)। ‘सो॑ऽर- ज्यत’ (अ.वे. १५.८.१)। Note: The reading te ’kravan of H led Whitney to suggest an emen- dation to te ’kr̥ṇvan, which “also is not to be found in the Atharvan.” The manuscript N offers a better reading: te ’bruvan. The example te ’vadan is cited in the KV on P.6.1.115 (प्रकृत्यान्तःपाद- मव्यपरे). However, this instance is also traceable to RV (10.109.1), and hence we cannot be sure if the KV is citing this passage from the AV. This rule is in part comparable to APR (99). We should note that all the examples in the CAB are found in the same order as examples 68-71 on APR (100). While admitting that this is an “exceedingly common sandhi,” Whitney observes: “The physical explanation of this combination is exceedingly diffi-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका421 cult.” Perhaps, one may suggest that as one moves from e or o to the conso- nant after the word initial a, one inevitably goes from a more open sound to a point of a relative oral constriction. If a is itself a close (saṃvr̥ta) sound, then it is just like a point in the normal transition from an open sound to a constriction. For other detailed explanations, see: Allen (1962: pp. 39ff) and Cardona (1987). ३.२.३१. क्वचित्प्रकृत्या । Whitney (3.54). I: 31. O: °प्रकृत्याः. Translation: Sometimes, [the word-initial a] remains un- changed. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - क्वचित्प्रकृत्या भवति । ‘ये अ॒ग्नयः॑’ (अ.वे. ३.२१.१)। ‘स॒ह॒स्रा॒र्घ(H, N: र्च)मि॒डो(H, N: डे) अत्र॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.४३)। Note: One may note that these exceptions are not specifically taken care of by the APR, except that the APR (100) refers to a nebulous rule: बहुलं छन्दसि. The present CA rule is comparable to P.6.1.115 (प्रकृत्यान्तःपादमव्यपरे) and the following rules. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that the example सहस्रर्चमिडे अत्र which is not attested in the Vulgate of the AV, possibly belongs to the now lost genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV. Whitney cites the ex- ample as सहास्रर्चम्, while both the manuscripts offer the reading सहस्रार्चम्. The reading सहस्रार्चमिडे अत्र is obviously a corruption for स॒ह॒स्रा॒र्घमि॒डो अत्र॑ (AV 18.1.43). This shows the fallacy of Surya Kanta’s hypothesis. इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः । H, N: तृतीयस्य द्वितीयपादः. E, F: तृतीयस्य द्वितीयः पादः. A, B, D, J, M: ॥२॥ छ ॥ इति द्वितीयः पादः. I: इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः. O: च. तृतीयस्य द्वितीयः पादः ॥ सूत्र ॥३१॥ P: ॥२ द्वितीयः पादः ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तृतीयस्य द्वितीयपादः ॥ ____________________________

॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ तृतीयः पादः ॥ ३.३.१. षडेव स्वरितजातानि लाक्षणाः प्रतिजानते । पूर्वं पूर्वं दृढतरं म्रदीयो यद्यदुत्तरम् ॥ Translations: The authorities [lit. makers of definitions] recognize only six types of circumflex (svarita) accent. Of these, [in the order in which they are explained], each preceding one is harder [than the succeeding one, and] the succeeding one is softer [than the preceding one]. Note: Whitney (p. 154) cites the five verses beginning with this verse as belonging to the commentary in the mss H. However, these verses are found in all the mss. which provide only the text of the CA. Since the CAB does not comment on these verses, it is possible that at one time they belonged to that commentary itself, but were incorporated later into the text of the CA. Whitney (1880: 162) says: “The passage introductory to the third section of this chapter and which, in the edition, I treated as a part of the commentary, is found in B., as if belonging to the text. That it belongs to the text, however, as an original and proper part of it, is by no means to be believed; it is, rather (along with the two similar passages to be noted later), the interpolation of some reworker. This is evidenced both by its own character and by the fact that the comment takes no notice of it; it did not belong to the treatise which the commentator took in hand to explain.” There is also a strong possibility, as suggested by Whitney, that these passages may be interpolations of a later period. However, since these verses are found in all manuscripts, including those that call themselves Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa, this incorporation must have taken place at a reasonably early time. Therefore, I have decided to treat these verses as part of the text of the CA as it can be reconstructed on the basis of our manuscripts. A, B, D: षडेच. E, F, I, O: लक्षणानि प्रति°. Surya Kanta (APR, Intro., p. 61) makes a far looser claim for incorporation of all sorts of portions of the commentary into what he styles the older CA: “A deeper analysis of CCA (= CAB) should suggest that the portion now styled as comment, is, in reality, nothing but relics of the older CA., that the metrical portions betokened by Whitney as citations from some ancient authority are mutilated parts of the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका423 older CA., and that longer metrical portions thrown into Additional Notes by the editor are definitely so. They are so, all the more, because in all the mss. of the CA., they are read as part of the Sūtra-text; they must, accordingly, be rein- stated to their proper position.” Not all the verses cited in the CAB are treated by the other manuscripts as belonging to the Sūtra-text, and one must make a careful distinction between these two classes of verses. The fact that certain verses are treated by most manuscripts as being part of the Sūtra-text does not by itself prove that they must be part of the original CA. They could very well be ancient interpolations into the Sūtra-text from the commentary. It is also true that the later text-tradition did treat them as being part of the Sūtra-text. As Whitney points out: “Precisely what is meant by ‘sharp’ (tīkṣṇa) and ‘hard’ (dr̥ḍha) on the one hand, and ‘soft’ (mr̥du) on the other, is not very clear: but that the proper circumflex, which arises upon the combination into a single syllable of an original acute and an original grave element, is more strongly marked and distinct in its quality of double pitch than that circumflex which is only enclitic, need not be doubted.” Some light is shed on this question by the possibility that different kinds of svaritas represent different levels of musical pitch. S. Varma (1929: 156), referring to Pāriśikṣā, informs us that the types jātya, abhinihita, and kṣaipra are pronounced with niṣāda, or the 7th note on the Indian musical scale. The types tairovyañjana and pādavr̥tta are pronounced with dhaivata, or the 6th note. The types praśliṣṭa and pratihata are pronounced with pañcama, or the 5th note. On the whole, one may conclude that higher musical pitch is referred to by the terms ‘sharp’ or ‘hard,’ and the lower musical pitch is referred to by the term ‘soft.’ This distinction is still common in the Indian classical music till today, where the term tīvra ‘sharp’ refers to higher pitch, and the term komala ‘delicate, soft’ refers to lower pitch. The order of the types of svarita given by the present CA verse does not completely match the one given by the Pāriśikṣā, but one does notice some shared features, and this indeed seems to be the intended difference between the various types of svarita. Unfortunately, the reciters of the ŚAV I met in India were not able to demonstrate these differences in their recitation, and it would seem that these distinctions have been lost in the recitation of the AV. ३.३.२.अभिनिहितः प्राश्लिष्टो जात्यः क्षैप्रश्च तावुभौ । तैरोव्यञ्जनपादवृत्तावेतत्स्वरितमण्डलम् ॥

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 424 Whitney (p. 154). A, B: °प्रास्त्विष्टो°. E, F, I, J, M: °प्राक्श्लिष्टो°. Whitney: °ता उभौ. A, B, D: °जात्यक्षैप्रश्च पादवृत्तश्च°. J, M, P: °जात्यः क्षैप्रश्च पाद- वृत्तश्च°. H, N: °पादवृत्तामेत°. O: °प्राश्लिष्टजात्यः°. Translation: Abhinihita, Prāśliṣṭa, and both Jātya and Kṣipra, as well as Tairovyañjana and Pādavr̥tta, - this is the group of svarita [varieties]. Note: The order of the different types of svaritas given in this verse, and assumed in all the first four verses of this section is directly correlated to the order in which these types are defined in the rules that follow, i.e. abhini- hita (3.3.6), praśliṣṭa (3.3.7), jātya (3.3.8), kṣaipra (3.3.9-12), tairovyañjana (3.3.13), and pādavr̥tta (3.3.14). This matching shows that the verses are inte- grally related to the rules that follow. The verses present the notions of relative hardness and softness of these types, but do not define their exact nature, while the later rules define the exact circumstances of each type, without going into the question of their relative hardness. However, both the sections assume the same order of presentation of these types, and hence are clearly complementary to each other. ३.३.३.सर्वतीक्ष्णोऽभिनिहितस्ततः प्राश्लिष्ट उच्यते । ततो मृदुतरौ स्वारौ जात्यः क्षैप्रश्च तावुभौ ॥ Whitney (p. 154). A, B, E, F, I, J, M: °प्राक्श्लिष्ट°. I: °प्राश्लिष्ट°. H, N: °प्रायश्चि°. M: स्वरौ for Svara=. O: °भिनिहितःस्ततः°. Translation: The abhinihita is the sharpest of all. [Softer] than that is said to be the prāśliṣṭa. Softer than that is the next pair of accents, i.e. jātya and kṣipra. Note: The verse is found in the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā (verse 82), Śikṣā- saṃgraha, p. 470. ३.३.४.ततो मृदुतरः स्वारस्तैरोव्यञ्जन उच्यते । पादवृत्तो मृदुतर इति स्वारबलाबलम् ॥ Whitney (p. 154). A, B, D, J, M, P: °मृदुतरस्वार°. H, N: °स्वारः तै°. E, F, N: °पादवृत्तौ°. B, D: °मृदुत्तर°. O: °स्वारःस्तैरो°. P adds इति as a correction.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका425 Translation: Softer than those is said to be the accent called tairovyañjana. The pādavr̥tta is softer [than that]. Such are the relative strengths and weaknesses of the svarita varieties. Note: This verse is also found in the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā (verse 83), Śikṣā- saṃgraha, p. 470. ३.३.५. अपर आह - तैरोव्यञ्जनपादवृत्तौ तुल्यवृत्ती इति । उदात्तः पूर्वः । परोऽनुदात्तः । स्वरितः सन्धिः । Whitney (p. 154). E, F, I, O: अपरः प्राह. O: °तुल्यवृत्तीत्युदात्तः°. D, E, F, J, M, O: °पूर्वपरो° for °पूर्वः । परो°. O, P: °स्वरितसंधिः. Translation: Another [phonetician] says: “Tairovyañjana and Pādavr̥tta are of similar utterance.” [In a svarita], the first [por- tion] is high-pitched (udātta). The following [portion] is low- pitched (anudātta). A svarita is a combination of these two. Note: The tag phrase apara āha clearly indicates that this was in all probability originally not part of the text of the CA, but that of a commentary. However, the entire passage is found in all the CA-text-only manuscripts. One may also note the curious fact that the text of the Varṇapaṭala, a Pariśiṣṭa of the AV, contains verses introduced with the phrase अपर आह, and the verses along with the tag phrase are cited in the CAB. See the commentary and the Note on CA (1.1.28: रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि). Whitney had assigned the entire preceding portion to the commentary. However, regarding उदात्तः पूर्वः, परोऽनुदात्तः, स्वरितः सन्धिः he said: “I am not al- together confident that this is not the first rule of the section, since, as we shall see, the two rules which follow are defective in form, and need some such predecessor. Considering, however, the faulty construction of the whole sec- tion, the limited applicability of the words in question as an adhikāra or heading for that which follows, their inconsistency with rule 66 (= CA 3.3.17) below, and the absence of the paraphrase and repetition which ought to follow them, if they are a rule, I have not ventured to regard them as a part of the treatise; they are more probably an addition of the commentator, intended to supply the de- ficiency of the next two rules.” As I pointed out in my Note on CA (3.3.1), Whitney was not willing to accept this initial portion as part of the text of the CA even after the discovery of a second manuscript of the CA which contained this portion. Now it is clear that each and every manuscript of the CA contains

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 426 this initial portion, and we have to accept it as part of the text of the CA. How- ever, it could have been a very early addition, which remained somewhat unas- similated even up to the composition of the CAB. ३.३.६. एकारौकारौ पदान्तौ परतोऽकारं सोऽभिनिहितः । Whitney (3.55). Ha, Na: एकारौ पदांतौ°. A, B: ऐकारौ°. E, F, I, O: °परतोऽकारः°. Translation: [Where] the final e or o [are merged with] the following a [resulting into e and o respectively], that [svarita] is [called] abhinihita. Note: The commentary adds significant information which is not ex- plicit in the rule itself. The commentator specifies that it is a combination of the final high-pitched e or o with the following low-pitched a. This general infor- mation is derived from the immediately preceding rule, CA (3.3.5). This rule is an exception to CA (3.3.17: एकादेश उदात्तेनोदात्तः), which prescribes that a combination of a high-pitched vowel with a non-high-pitched vowel, resulting in a single substitute for both (ekādeśa), is high-pitched. Whitney criticizes the CA : “the treatise nowhere informs us under what circumstances a circumflex accent arises in connection with the meeting of a final e or o and an initial a, or even that it arises at all.” Indeed the treatise, CA (3.2.30: एकारौकारान्तात् पूर्वः पदादेरकारस्य), teaches the single substitute in such cases. The present section, headed by CA (3.3.5) tells us that, under certain circumstances, such combina- tions become svaritas, and the present rule tells us that this specific combina- tion of a high-pitched e or o with the following low-pitched a becomes a spe- cific type of svarita, i.e. abhinihita. Whitney believes that the CA should have combined all this with the fact that such a svarita combination is an exception to CA (3.3.17), and the fact that the author of the CA has not done so leads Whitney to say: “We can hardly avoid supposing that the constructors of this part of the treatise have not been skillful enough, or careful enough, to combine the two subjects of the section in such a manner as to give completeness to both.” There is indeed an internal logic to the presentation of the CA rules, including the initial verses of this section, which Whitney misses. For details, see the Note on CA (3.3.2). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकारौकारौ पदान्तौ उदात्तौ परतः अकारम् पदादि अनुदात्तं स अभिनिहितः स्वरो भवति ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका427 ‘ते॑ऽवदन्’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.१)। ‘तेऽब्रु(H: क्र)वन्’ (तै.सं. २.५.१.३)। ‘सो॑ऽब्रवीत्’ (अ.वे. १५.३.२)। ‘यो॑ऽस्य॒ दक्षि॑णः॒ कर्णः॑’ (अ.वे. १५.१८.३)। ‘सो॑ऽरज्यत’ (अ.वे. १५.८.१)। Note: The example te ’bruvan, TS (2.5.1.3) is cited as an example of abhinihata in the commentary Vaidikābharaṇa on TPR (20.10). We should note that all the examples in the CAB, including the unattested te ’bruvan, are found in the same order as examples 68-71 on APR (100). The same exam- ples are cited in the CAB on CA 3.2.30. Whitney notes that in parataḥ akāram ‘with a following’ the commen- tator treats the word akāram as a neuter nominative. A nominative with parataḥ, in the sense of ‘with x following’ or ‘x is on the other side,’ is not un- common in Sanskrit, cf. yaḥ and parataḥ in यो बुद्धेः परतस्तु सः, Bhagavadgītā (3.42d). What is uncommon is the neuter gender of the word akāra. The MB also uses the word varṇa in both masculine and neuter genders. ३.३.७. इकारयोः प्राश्लिष्टः । Whitney (3.56). D, E, F, H, I (corr), J, M (corr), N, P: °प्राक्श्लिष्टः. Translation: [The svarita arising out of a combination] of two short i vowels is [called] prāśliṣṭa. Note: While a combination of any two i vowels, long or short, results in a long ī vowel, not all such resulting long ī vowels are evidently eligible for the title of prāśliśṭa. The second constraint, as explained by the commentary, and evidently implied in this case by the continuing force of CA (3.3.5), is that of these two short i vowels being combined, the first one is originally high- pitched, and the second one is originally low-pitched. Thus, this rule also becomes an exception to CA (3.3.17) which says that a combination of a high- pitched vowel with a non-high-pitched vowel, resulting in a single substitute, becomes high-pitched. Whitney finds that if the first high-pitched vowel is a long ī and the following low-pitched vowel is a short i, “it is very natural that, as the more powerful element, it should assimilate the weaker grave vowel, and make the whole compound accute.” But the reverse situation is more problematic. “The cases in which a long unaccented ī, on the other hand, is preceded by a short accented í, are exceedingly rare. … We should, however, expect that in such a

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 428 compound, especially the circumflex would not fail to appear; for if, in the fu- sion of í and i, the grave accent of the second element is represented in the ac- centuation of the resulting vowel, by so much the more, should this be the case in the fusion of í + i, where the second element is the stronger. The teachings of the accentual theory are so obvious and explicit upon this point that it is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that the Hindu grammarians, in estab- lishing their system, overlooked or disregarded the combination í+ī, on account of its rarity, and that the accent of the cases later noted was made to conform to the rule, instead of the rule being amended to fit the cases.” Perhaps, Whitney has been a bit too impatient. First, there is no glob- ally accepted accentual theory, which predicts results for each Vedic school, and, as Whitney himself notes, the different schools disagree on the scope and nature of prāśliṣṭa svarita. Given the fact that the prāśliṣṭa ranks the second highest in hardness or sharpness of musical pitch, it seems natural that what the early AV reciters were looking for in a prāśliṣṭa is the musical height of the high portion of the prāśliṣṭa, rather than the prominence of the low-pitched part, as Whitney seems to imply above. There are major differences on the scope of prāśliṣṭa among the various phonetic and grammatical authorities, and Whitney has eminently surveyed these different views in his comments on the present rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इकारयो(ः) उदात्तानुदात्तयोः प्राश्लि- ष्टः स्वरो भवति । ‘अ॒भी॑हि मन्यो’ (अ.वे. ४.३२.३)। ‘भि॒न्धी॒[]दम्’ (अ.वे. ७.१८.१)। ‘दि॒शी॒[]तः’ (अ.वे. ११.२.१२)। इकारयोरिति किमर्थम् । ‘मा व॒निं मा वाचं॑ नो॒ वीर्त्स॑ीः’ (अ.वे. ५.७.६)। परो दीर्घः । इह अस्मात्प्रा- श्लिष्टो न भवति । ‘अती॑व॒ यः’ (अ.वे. २.१२.६)। (क्रम ! ) ‘अती॒वेत्यति॑ इव’ । तैरोव्यञ्जन इत्येषः । ‘इकारयोः(H: इकारः, Whitney: ई°) प्राश्लिष्टो यदा स्यादुदात्तः पूर्वः परोऽनुदात्तः । स प्राश्लिष्टः स्वर्यत एव नित्यं सन्धिजं स्वरितं नान्यदाहुः ॥’ (source?) ‘दि॒वी॑व चक्षुः॑’ (अ.वे. ७.२६.७)। ‘दि॒वी॑व॒ ज्योतिः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.९२.३)। (क्रम !) ‘दि॒वी॑वेति॑ दि॒वि इ॑व’ ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका429 Note: Whitney (1862: 159) translates the end portion of the com- mentary beginning with atīva : “in the passage átī ’va yáḥ (ii.12.6) - where the krama-text would read átī ’vé’ty áti-iva - the circumflex of the ī is tairovyañjana (see rule 62 = CA 3.3.13). When an ī is the result of praśleṣa, the former ele- ment being acute and latter grave, the result of praśleṣa is always made circum- flex. No other circumflex accent is declared to arise from the sandhi. Instances are divR_i_macron_grave ’va cákṣuḥ (vii.26.7), divR_i_macron_grave ’va jyótiḥ (vi.92.3), where the krama-text reads divR_i_macron_grave ’vé ’ti diví-iva.” He is not sure of his interpretation, and thinks that “its significance is evidently of the smallest.” The first point to make, which apparently escaped Whitney’s attention, is that there is a verse cited here. Secondly, the manuscript N offers the read- ing ikārayoḥ which fits the meter better and is probably the original reading. Third, the cited verse offers a context for CA (3.3.5) to be brought down to bear on the interpretation of the present rule of the CA, indicating that CA (3.3.5) is in all likelihood a genuine part of the CA. Finally, the verse adds support to the (3.3.7) itself, in reinforcing the view that, in the AV tradition of recitation, the prāśliṣṭa svarita was limited to the combination resulting from í+i. Finally, it says that it is always pronounced as a svarita, indicating that it is no longer a prosodically variable syllable, but always remains svarita. The last quarter of the verse still remains enigmatic to me. ३.३.८. अनुदात्तपूर्वात्संयोगाद्यवान्तात्स्वरितं परमपूर्वं वा जात्यः । Whitney (3.57). A, B, D: °ता स्वरि°. J: अनुदात्तात्पूर्वसंयोगा°. O reads सरितं for स्वरितं. P: °संयोगाद्यवात्तात्स्व°. Translation: A svarita, which follows a consonant cluster ending in y or v, - a consonant cluster which is either preceded by an unaccented vowel, or is not preceded by any vowel - is [called] jātya. Note: The term jātya indicates that this particular variety of svarita is an integral part of a word, it is born with it. It is lexical, rather than born out of discourse or prosody. Whitney notes: “no syllable in Sanskrit has an inde- pendent circumflex accent except as it results from the conversion of an origi- nal accented í or ú (short or long) into its corresponding semivowel y or v.” The important thing to note, however, is that it arises “in connection with the combination of syllables into words, rather than of words into a sentence.” Thus, the jātya svarita arises as part of derivation of a word, or as a result of internal sandhi, rather than as a result of an external sandhi (= kṣaipra svarita).

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 430 Whitney complains: “The definition or description of the jātya circum- flex given by our treatise is after all imperfect, since it fails properly to distin- guish the jātya from the kṣaipra. Such kṣaipra accents as are instanced by abhy àrcata (vii.82.1), nv èténa (v.6.5), and the like, answer in every particular to the defined character of the jātya. The word pade, ‘in an independent or un- combined word,’ or something equivalent, needs to be added to the rule.” Whitney’s problem lies in confusing his understanding of the historical evolution of Sanskrit and its derivational morphology with the assumptions made by the authors of the Prātiśākhya. The CA rules 3.3.8 and 3.3.9, defin- ing the jātya and kṣaipra varieties make a very important and subtle distinction. CA (3.3.8) speaks of jātya as a svarita coming after a consonant cluster ending in y or v, and makes no reference to y and v being results of sandhi, or being substitutes for some ‘original’ í or ú, like Whitney. Ideally, the Pratiśākhya is not interested in internal word-derivation, and, therefore, the morph+morph sandhi, or internal sandhi, is of no value to it, unless it somehow participates in pada <> samhitā transformations. Therefore, the results of the so-called internal sandhi are not treated by the Prātiśākhya as results of any transformation, but as given facts. In contrast with CA (3.3.8), the wording of CA (3.3.9), defining the kṣaipra svarita, clearly makes a reference to sandhi- transformation - antaḥsthāpatti - of í and ú into y and v before unaccented vowels. By such a transformative process, the Prātiśākhya refers only to exter- nal sandhi. In a word like kvà, the modern linguist may see a derivational process from kú+a. However, the Prātiśākhya does not call this process antaḥsthāpatti - transformation of vowels into semivowels. It takes the form kvà for granted, and this is what makes this type of svarita a jātya svarita ‘born with the word.’ Thus, Whitney’s criticisms of the formulation of these rules shows a certain lack of comprehension of the assumptions made by the CA, which can be easily recovered from the wording of the rules. Thus, the CA can clearly separate the jātya variety from the kṣaipra variety. While the CAB does not make these assumptions explicit, it offers the correct examples for the jātya and the kṣaipra varieties. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनुदात्तपूर्वात् संयोगात् यवान्तात् स्वरितं परम् अपूर्वम् वा जात्यस्वरो भवति । ‘अ॒मा॒वा॒स्या॑’ (अ.वे. ७.७९.२)। ‘क॒न्या॑’ (अ.वे. १.१४.२)। ‘धा॒न्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ३.२४.२)। ‘आ॒चा॒र्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ११.५.३)। ‘रा॒ज॒-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका431 न्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१७.९)। ‘न्य॑क्’ (अ.वे. ६.९१.२)। ‘क्व॑’ (अ.वे. ९.९.४)। ‘स्वः॑’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। Note: The CAB on CA (1.1.17) offers exactly the same examples. Also see the Note on CA (1.1.17). It may be noted that somehow the jātya svarita is the most basic svarita of all the types. ३.३.९. अन्तस्थापत्तावुदात्तस्यानुदात्ते क्षैप्रः । Whitney (3.58). No mss reads अन्तः°, though Whitney has this reading. A, B: °नुदात्तै क्षैप्रः. Translation: When, [in external sandhi], a high-pitched vowel is transformed into a semi-vowel, before a low-pitched vowel, the resulting svarita is [called] kṣaipra. Note: For a clear distinction between the jātya and kṣaipra varieties, and the assumptions made by the CA rules, see the Note on CA (3.3.9). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्तस्थापत्तौ उदात्तस्यानुदात्ते परतः क्षैप्रः स्वरो भवति । ‘अ॒भ्य॑र्चत’ (अ.वे. ७.८२.१)। ‘वी॒क्त॑ङ्गः’ (अ.वे. ६.१२५.१)। ‘मात्रर्थम्’ (not in AV)। ‘पित्रर्थम्’ (not in AV)। Note: The KV on P.6.1.77 (इको यणचि) cites the example kartrartham. ३.३.१०. अन्तःपदेऽपि पञ्चपद्याम् । Whitney (3.59). B, D: °पादे°. Translation: Even within the same word, in the first five case-forms [i.e. nominative sg., du., and pl., and accusative sg., and du., when a high-pitched vowel is transformed into a semi- vowel, before a low-pitched vowel, the resulting svarita is called kṣaipra]. Note: Whitney comments: “Not one of the other treatises offers any- thing corresponding; they would all, apparently, class as jātya the circumflex

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 432 accents here treated of, not distinguishing them from the others which occur within the limits of a word, or in the uncombined text. The rules, however, are not without some interest, as showing that the authors of our text appreciated the entire analogy which the circumflex accents with which they deal have with the ordinary kṣaipra. Thus nadyàs is equivalent to nadī́.as, as nadyàsti would be to nadī́ asti, while nadyā́i, nadyā́s represent nadī-ā́i, nadī-ā́s; the terminations of the strong cases showing no trace of that tendency which is exhibited by the other case-endings to draw away upon themselves the accent of the final vowel of the theme: compare tudántam, tudántau, tudántas, with tudatā́, tudatós, tu- datás.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्तःपदेऽपि पञ्चपद्यामन्तस्थापत्तौ उदात्तस्यानुदात्ते परतः क्षैप्रः स्वरो भवति । ‘न॒द्यो॒ नाम॑ स्थ’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.१)। ‘पि॒प्प॒ल्यः सम्’ (अ.वे. ६.१०९. २)। ‘रु॒द॒त्यः पुरु॑षे ह॒ते’ (अ.वे. ११.९.१४)। पञ्चपद्या- मिति किमर्थम् । ‘तया॑ सहस्रप॒र्ण्या हृद॑यम्’ (अ.वे. ६. १३९.१)। ‘अन्तोदात्ता नदी न्यायाद्ध्रस्वनामि च यत्तथा । अपञ्चपद्यां वचनमुदात्तः क्षैप्र उच्यते ॥’ (source?) Note: The text of the verse given above is based largely on the manu- script N. The reading in H is even more corrupt: अन्तोदात्ता नदी न्याया ह्रस्वनामि चत्तथा. APR (57, p. 48), as given by Surya Kanta reads: चत्वारि क्षैप्रश्च पञ्चपद्यामन्तोदात्तादीनि यात्. For the last portion, Surya Kanta cites the mss. vari- ants अन्तोदात्तादीनि न्यायात्, अन्तोदातादीनि न्यायात्, and अन्तोदात्तानि दीयात्. If Surya Kanta has reconstructed the correct reading for this APR rule, then, assuming that a similar confusion may have taken place with our verse quoted in the CAB, the verse could be partially restored as: अन्तोदात्तादीनि यात् ह्रस्वनामि च यत् तथा । अपञ्चपद्यां वचनमुदात्तः क्षैप्र उच्यते ॥ Surya Kanta (APR, Notes, p. 24) offers the following interpretations for some of the words which appear in APR (57): “antodāttādīni = antodāttaḥ (ī́+am) ādir yeṣāṃ tāni. yāt = through y letter (ī́+a = yà), vilīḍhī́+am= vilīḍhí- am=yà.” With all this partial restoration, the verse still remains metrically irregular.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका433 I propose an alternative interpretation of the verse, as it now reads in the text given above: ‘अन्तोदात्ता नदी न्यायाद्ध्रस्वनामि च यत्तथा । अपञ्चपद्यां वचनमुदात्तः क्षैप्र उच्यते ॥’ “[For] feminine stems ending in ī́ and ū́, in accordance with the rule [= nyāyāt], and [for the feminine stems ending in] short nāmin [i.e. í and ú] which also [occasionally] behave like [the feminine stems in ī́ and ū́], in weak cases [= apañcapadyām], the high-pitched vowel is pronounced. [In strong cases = pañcapadyām, by contrast], a kṣaipra svarita is pronounced.” I suspect that the word nadī in the verse is used in its Pāṇinian technical meaning, i.e. a feminine stem ending either in ī or ū, cf. P.1.4.3 (यू स्त्र्याख्यौ नदी). Here, the verse seems to refer to antodāttā nadī, “feminine stems ending in ī́ and ū́.” I admit that this interpretation also requires a good deal of “constructive imagination,” and I would welcome a better proposal. ३.३.११. उकारस्य सर्वत्र । Whitney (3.60): ऊकार°. P: उकारश्च°. Translation: [When a final] ú [and ū́ are transformed into v before a low-pitched vowel], in all cases [i.e. strong as well as weak cases, the low-pitched vowel is pronounced as a kṣaipra svarita]. Note: The major confusion regarding this rule is whether it should read ukārasya as all the manuscripts have it, or as ūkārasya as Whitney emends it, or something still different. Whitney says: “The manuscript reads in this rule ukārasya, ‘if the final is u,’ but the facts seem to require the amendment to ū, and the method of writing of our copyist is too careless to make his authority of much weight against it.” Part of APR (57, p. 48) also reads ukārasya sarvatra and is clearly a related rule. Surya Kanta (APR, Notes, p. 24) says “better ūkārasya” and refers to the present CA rule, without realizing that Whitney gave the reading ūkārasya, while his manuscript actually read ukārasya. The dilemma arises because if the rule is ukārasya, it will cover only the examples in short u, while ūkārasya, as suggested by Whitney and Surya Kanta, will cover only the examples in long ū. Among the examples cited by the CAB, the stems tanū, camū, and vadhū end in long ū. the other hand, the CAB cites a number of exceptions, and among these exceptions, two stems, i.e. pr̥dāku and urvāru, end in short u, while śvaśrū ends in long ū. Somehow,

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 434 Whitney does not notice that two of these exceptions have stems ending in short u, as he clearly acknowledges in his Index Verborum. If the rule is read ūkārasya, then the exceptions with stems in short u do not make any sense. On the other hand, if the rule is read ukārasya, as justified by the manuscripts, the positive examples with stems in long ū do not make any sense. Perhaps, what one needs is the reading uvarṇasya, which no manuscript supports. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उकारस्य सर्वत्र अन्तस्थापत्तौ उदात्त- स्य अनुदात्ते परतः क्षैप्रस्वरो भवति । ‘त॒न्वा॑’ (अ.वे. १. ३३.४)। ‘त॒न्वे॒[]’ (अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘उ॒त्ता॒नयो॑श्च॒म्वो॒- []ः’ (अ.वे. ९.१०.१२)। ‘व॒ध्व॑श्च॒ वस्त्र॑म्’ (अ.वे. ‘पृ॒दा॒क्वाः’ (अ.वे. १०.४.५)। ‘श्व॒श्र्वै’ (H, N: श्वशुरः, Whitney: ‘श्वश्र्वै’)(अ.वे. १४.२.२६)। ‘श्व॒श्र्वाः’ (अ.वे. १४.१.४४)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 60-61) points out that the APR (57b) shares with the CAB even the corrupt reading śvaśuraḥ for the re- quired śvaśrvai. This is explainable by referring to the fact that a large number of the mss. of the APR and the CA are found in the same bundles, are copied by and meant for the same person. However, in this case, the two texts do not cite all identical examples. Under ततोऽपवदति, the CAB cites the first four ex- amples out of the five listed by the APR. In this case, even the phrase ततोऽप- वदति is shared with the APR (57b). It should also be pointed out that while the examples cited as exceptions to the rule are mostly identical in both the texts, the positive examples are not so identical. What this perhaps indicates is that one should not assume that the CAB directly copied its examples from the APR. Most probably, there existed a list of gaṇas, like the Gaṇapāṭha of the Pāṇinian tradition, which was used by both. However, where the examples were only illustrative, and not part of a closed gaṇa, the two texts cited in- dependent illustrations. There is no indication in the CA rule of there being exceptions to this rule. However, the CAB and the APR both share the same list of exceptions. Thus, it is conceivable that the original rules did not envi- sion any such exceptions, and that the commentary reflects a changed state of the Atharvan text. After listing the exceptions cited by the CAB, Whitney adds: “to which is to be added vadhvā́i (xiv.2.9, 73).” The gaṇa as listed in the APR already

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका435 contains this instance. Then Whitney observes: “All these exceptional forms, it will be remarked, have a heavy ending, while those which exhibit the circum- flex accent the ending is light in every instance but one (tanvā̀m).” Whitney’s additional exceptions: “The words bāhvós (e.g. vii.56.6) and ūrvós (xix.60.2) are instances - and, if my search has been thorough, the only ones which the text presents - of like forms from themes in u, which are not to be regarded as contemplated by the rule.” ३.३.१२. ओण्योश्च । Whitney (3.61). O: ॐण्योश्च. Translation: Also in the form oṇyòḥ, [the final syllable from -ṇī́+oḥ is a kṣaipra svarita]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ओण्योश्च क्षैप्रः स्वरो भवति । ‘ओ॒ण्योः॑ क॒विक्र॑तुम्’ (अ.वे. ७.१४.१)। Note: The example oṇyòḥ cited by the CAB is listed under APR (55, p. 55). However, there is no indication in APR whether this represents a kṣaipra. ३.३.१३. व्यञ्जनव्यवेतस्तैरोव्यञ्जनः । Whitney (3.62). E, F, I: °व्यपेत°. A, B: °व्यवेते°. O: °व्यपेतःस्तैरो°. Translation: [The svarita] which is separated [from the pre- ceding high-pitched vowel] by consonants is called tairo- vyañjana. Note: Whitney observes: “There is here a notable change of subject and of implication. We have passed without any warning, from considering the necessary or independent circumflex to treating of that which is enclitic only, arising, according to following rules (rules 67-70 = CA 3.3.18-21), in an unaccented syllable, which is preceded by an acute, and not again immediately followed by an acute or circumflex.” Whitney discusses other subdivisions of this type as prescribed by other texts, e.g. tairovirāma, in which the preceding high-pitched vowel belongs to the first member of a compound-word,

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 436 separated in the Padapāṭha by an avagraha, or a brief pause, for example prajā́- vat, where the unaccented a of vat is prosodically changed to a svarita. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यञ्जनव्यवेतस्तैरोव्यञ्जनः स्वरो भवति । ‘इ॒दं दे॑वाः’ (अ.वे. २.१२.२)। ‘इ॒दमि॑न्द्र’ (अ.वे. २.१२.३)। ३.३.१४. विवृत्तौ पादवृत्तः । Whitney (3.63). B, D: विवृतौ°. Translation: Where there is a hiatus [between the preceding high-pitched vowel and the following low-pitched vowel, the resulting svarita for the low-pitched vowel is called] pādavr̥tta. Note: Whitney notes that the RPR calls this type vaivr̥tta, ‘arising in connection with a hiatus,’ and further observes: “The term pādavr̥tta is evi- dently a mutilated substitute for pādavivr̥tta or pādavaivr̥tta, ‘arising in connec- tion with a hiatus between two words.’” Whitney’s footnote further clarifies: “The definition of the Taitt. Pr. (xx.6) brings out this derivation more distinctly than our own; we read there pada-vivr̥ttyām pādavr̥ttaḥ.” The important point clarified by the TPR definition is that this type of svarita has to do with a hiatus between two padas ‘words,’ rather than between two pādas ‘metrical feet.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विवृत्तौ पादवृत्तः स्वरो भवति । ‘याः कृ॒त्या अा॑ङ्गिर॒सीर्याः कृ॒त्या अा॑सु॒रीर्याः कृ॒त्याः स्व॒यंकृ॑ता॒ या उ॑ चा॒न्येभि॒राभृ॑ताः’ (अ.वे. ८.५.९)। Note: The manuscript N has a lacuna. After the word svayaṃkr̥tā, the manuscript resumes with the end portion of the commentary on CA 3.3.24. ३.३.१५. अवग्रहे सविधः । Whitney (3.64). Translation: With the separation [of members of compound- words by a brief pause, the accents of the separated parts re- main] of the same pattern [as before the separation].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका437 Note: The recitational tradition, in the context of the Padapāṭha, thus distinguishes between a longer pause between the words which produces pro- sodically discontinuous segments and the brief pause (avagraha) between members of compound-words which does not produce prosodically discon- tinuous segments. Of the several possible interpretations of this rule, Whitney prefers this wider interpretation: “Notwithstanding an avagraha, the accent of a following syllable remains just what it would be were there no such pause; a hiatus conditioning a pādavr̥tta, and the intervention of consonants a tairo- vyañjana.” Whitney points out that such a wider interpretation “is supported by the authority of the Rik. Pr., which lays down the general principle (iii.15, r.23, ccx) that where syllables are separated by avagraha, there accentuation is the same as if they were connected with one another according to the rules of sandhi.” The CAB, on the other hand, seems to prefer a narrower interpretation, applying only to those cases of avagraha, where a hiatus is created by splitting the vowels apart due to an avagraha, which had been merged by sandhi in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. Such a narrow interpretation is indicated by the kind of exam- ples cited by the commentary. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवग्रहे सविधः स्वस्वरो भवति । ‘उ॒क्ष॒ऽअ॑न्नाय, व॒शाऽअन्ना॑य’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२१.६)। ‘य॒ज्ञऽ- ऋतः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.१०.४)। ‘श॒तऽओ॑दना’ (अ.वे. १०.९.१)। ‘श॒तऽअा॑युषा’ (अ.वे. ३.११.३, ४)। ‘दी॒र्घऽ- अा॑युषा’ (not in AV)। ‘दी॒र्घऽअा॑युषः’ (not in AV)। Note: Whitney notes that the nominative dīrghá-āyuḥ is found at AV (xiv.2.2, 63). ३.३.१६. अभिनिहितप्राश्लिष्टजात्यक्षैप्राणामुदात्तस्वरितोदयानामणुमात्रा निघातो विकम्पितं तत्कवयो वदन्ति । Whitney (3.65). E, F, I (corr), M (corr): °प्राक्श्लिष्ट°. A, D, J: अभिनिहितः । … स्वरितोदयामणु°. O, P: अभिनिहितः. O: °प्राश्लिष्टजात्यः°. Translation: Of [the four types of svarita, i.e.] abhinihita, prāśliṣṭa, jātya, and kṣaipra, followed by a high-pitched or cir- cumflex, a quarter-mora quantity is made to fall [below the

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 438 normal level of low-pitch accent], and that [phenomenon] is called vikampita ‘oscillation’ by the wise. Note: Whitney has a very long discussion on this rule, and to do full justice to it would need a dissertation by itself. To respond to his main thrust, Whitney seems to look at the entire discussion of the accents in the Prātiśākhyas as a matter of grammatical theory, rather than as facts of a recita- tional tradition. Referring to Hindu grammar, Whitney says: “Whether the Hindu grammar is much the gainer by this intense elaboration of the accentual theory may fairly be questioned: whether, indeed, it has not lost more than it has gained by the exaggeration, and even the distortion, in more than one par- ticular, of the natural inflections of the voice. To me, I must acknowledge, it seems clear that those ancient grammarians might better have contented them- selves with pointing out in each word the principal accent and its character, leaving the proclitic and enclitic accents, the claimed involuntary accompani- ments of the other, to take care of themselves; or, if they could not leave them unnoticed, at least stating them in a brief and general way, as matters of nice phonetic theory, without placing them on a level with the independent accents, and drawing our a complete scheme of rules for their occurrence.” In his com- ments, Whitney seems to foreshadow the distinction between phonetic versus phonemic, which developed in later times, and seems to feel that the function of the authors of the Prātiśākhyas was, or should have been, closely similar to that of the modern grammarians of Sanskrit. Here, he completely misses the main point of the Prātiśākhyas. They are, first and foremost, description of recita- tional practice, rather than that of some abstract theory. Consider the distinc- tion between pratijñā ‘doctrine’ and vr̥tti ‘recitational practice’ drawn by CA in 1.1.1. The second point missed by Whitney is that the accent as understood by the Prātiśākhyas, and as observed in the recitational practice, is already fully musical, and hence, in theory as well as in practice, afforded a far wider latitude of up and down pitch movement, as compared to accent in natural speech. The statements at the beginning of this pāda of the CA, indicate that the various types of svarita rank differently in terms of the sharpness of the musical note reached in their utterance. Thus, the notion of phonological redundancy of all this phonetic or recitational detail is a peculiarly western theoretical problem, and shows a lack of comprehension of the function of the Prātiśākhyas. Within the description of the CA it makes eminent sense why a feeling of vibration or kampa would be created only for some varieties of svarita than for others. The rising portion of the different varieties of svarita rises to differ- ent musical heights, and the first four varieties, i.e. abhinihita, prāśliṣṭa, jātya,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका439 and kṣaipra rise higher than tairovyañjana and pādavr̥tta. Then, before a high- pitched udātta or a svarita, with its initial rising element, the falling segment of these four varieties of svarita the normal level of anudātta. From this lower than the low position, the pitch then rises again to the high of the fol- lowing udātta, or to the higher than high of the following svarita. This natu- rally creates a feeling of vibrating or swinging up and down the musical scale. Nighāta Normal Levels—– K A M P A —– Nighāta Svarita High Svarita Udātta High Svarita Svarita Anudātta Udātta Different manuscripts have different methods of marking accents, cf. Witzel (1974) for a comprehensive discussion. The printed editions have generally opted for the method used in the R̥gveda. For the notation of kampa, Whitney points out: “A svarita immediately preceding an udātta cannot receive simply the usual svarita sign, lest the following syllable be deemed a pracaya instead of udātta. The method followed in such a case by the Rik is to append to the circumflexed vowel a figure 1 or 3 - 1 if the vowel be short, 3 if it be long - and to attach to this figure the signs of both svarita and of anudātta.” In the text of the commentary below, I have placed these figures in square brack- ets, since they do not appear in the manuscripts of the commentary, but are provided from the printed text of the AV. Whitney has additionally given a plausible explanation for the origin of this notation, cf. Whitney (1862: 169). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभिनिहितप्राश्लिष्टजात्यक्षैप्र इत्येषा- मुदात्तस्वरितोदयानाम् अणुमात्रा निघातो(H: ता) भवति । विकम्पितं तत् कवयो वदन्ति । अभिनिहितः । ‘यो॒[]भि-

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 440 या॑तः’ (अ.वे. ११.२.१३)। ‘ये॒[]स्याम्’ (अ.वे. ३.२६. १)। ‘सोऽर्थम्’ (‘सो॒[]भ्वम्,’ correction suggested by Whitney, अ.वे. १३.४.२५)। अभिनिहितः । प्राश्लिष्टः । ‘भि॒न्धी॒[]दम्’ (अ.वे. ७.१८.१)। ‘दि॒शी॒[]तः’ (अ.वे. ११.२.१२)। प्राश्लिष्टः । जात्यः । ‘अ॒मावा॒स्या॒[]’ (अ.वे. ७.७९.२)। ‘स्व[]ः’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)। जात्यः । क्षैप्रः । ‘न॒द्यो॒[] नाम॑(H: मी) स्थ’ (अ.वे. ३.१३.१)। ‘पि॒प्प॒ल्य[]ः सम्’ (अ.वे. ६.१०९.२)। ‘रु॒द॒त्य[]ः पुरु॑षे ह॒ते’ (अ.वे. ११.९.१४)। ३.३.१७. एकादेश उदात्तेनोदात्तः । Whitney (3.66). Identical with P.8.2.5. Translation: [As a general principle], the single replacement for a high-pitched vowel [combined with a non-high-pitched vowel] is high-pitched. Note: This is a general rule, and has a few exceptions, i.e. CA (3.3.6- 7): The vowels é and ó, when they absorb the following a, become è and ò, and í+i become R_i_macron_grave. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकादेशः उदात्तेन सह उदात्तो भवति। ‘धि॒येहि’ (पद ! ‘धि॒या । आ । इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘जुष॒स्वेन्द्र॑’ (पद ! ‘जु॒ष॒स्व॒ । आ । इ॒न्द्र॒,’ अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘स्तनयि॒त्नुनेहि॑’ (पद ! ‘स्तनयित्नुना॑ । आ । इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. ४.१५.११)। ‘कुष्ठेहि॑’ (पद ! ‘कुष्ठ॑ । आ। इ॒हि॒,’ अ.वे. ५.४.१)। ‘उद॒केनेहि॑’ (पद ! ‘उ॒द॒-केन॑ । आ । इ॒हि॒’, अ.वे. ६.६८.१)। ‘अव॑ पश्य॒तेत॑’ (पद ! ‘अव॑ । प॒श्य॒त॒ । आ । इ॒त॒,’ अ.वे. १८.४.३७)। Note: All the examples cited here by the CAB are cited in the same order under APR (8).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका441 ३.३.१८. उदात्तादनुदात्तं स्वर्यते । Whitney (3.67). J: स्वरितादनुदात्तं°. Translation: A low-pitched vowel, following a high-pitched [syllable], becomes circumflexed. Note: The svarita or the circumflex accent defined here is the enclitic svarita. As Whitney points out, “it is, as we have seen above (rules 62, 63 = CA 3.3.13-4), subdivided into the two kinds called tairovyañjana and pāda- vr̥tta, according as one or more consonants, or only a hiatus, intervene between the acute vowel and its successor.” It is to be noted here that the first element of a svarita was, for many of its varieties, higher than the normal height of an udātta, while the anudātta pre- ceding an udātta remained anudātta according to CA (3.3.21), or became lower than the normal low according to Pāṇini, cf. P.1.2.40 (उदात्तस्वरितपरस्य सन्नतरः). The printed editions of the AV follow the Pāṇinian or the R̥gvedic method of marking the sannatara. Thus, the two most noticeable peaks of musical notes during the recitation were the higher than the high of the svarita and the lower than the low of the sannatara. Otherwise, for the recitational purposes, the in- termediate high and low levels represented by the normal udātta and the normal anudātta actually collapsed into a single level, as indicated by CA (3.3.22) which says that the anudātta syllable after a svarita has the same pitch as that of the udātta. Thus, the historical values of udātta and anudātta collapsed into an unmarked pitch level. The initial high of the svarita moved up from this level, and the lower-than-low of sannatara moved down from this level. Thus, from a purely recitational point of view, the historical udātta could not be distin- guished from the anudātta. This clearly indicates the nature of the recitational tradition. Burrow (1955: 114) remarks: “According to the usual system, that adopted in the R̥gveda for instance, the principle is to mark the syllable pre- ceding the udātta, the sannatara, with a subscript line, and the dependent svarita following the udātta by a vertical stroke above. The udātta itself is left un- marked. … The modern recitation of the R̥gveda follows the notational system to the extent of pronouncing the sannatara lowest and the svarita highest musi- cally of syllables and ignoring the udātta altogether. This is a secondary devel- opment although it may be old, and at variance with the teachings of Pāṇini which are in complete agreement with the findings of comparative philology.” It is clear that Pāṇini, who specifically defines the occasion for sannatara, knew that it was pronounced lower than the normal anudātta. Similarly, the CA, as

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 442 discussed above, knew that many varieties of svarita rose above the normal level of udātta, and their falling levels went below the normal level of anudātta. Similarly, the CA clearly says that the anudāttas, which follow an udātta or a svarita have the same śruti ‘auditory quality’ as the udātta. This is a clear proof of the unmarked udātta and unmarked anudātta having fallen together to a common unmarked middle pitch level. While, I agree with Burrow that this is a secondary development, it is indeed very old. To the extent it is true to the recitational practice, one need not follow Burrow (ibid, p. 113) in calling the notational system as “unnecessarily complicated.” Strictly speaking, according to the CA description, the first part of the dependent svarita is not higher than udātta, and the anudātta before an udātta or a svarita remains an anudātta, and does not become sannatara, the marking system adopted by many manuscripts, and by all the printed editions, shows the svarita with a vertical line, and the anudātta before an udātta or a svarita with a subscript line. These markings hint at the R̥gveda-like recitation of the AV. The AV reciters I have heard do not distinguish the AV recitation from the RV recitation in these respects. Thus, there may indeed be a strong RV influence on the AV recitational tradi- tion, driving it somewhat farther away from the description of the accents as given in the CA. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उदात्तादनुदात्तं स्वर्यते । ‘इ॒दं दे॑वाः’ (अ.वे. २.१२.२)। ‘इ॒दमि॑न्द्र’ (अ.वे. २.१२.३)। ३.३.१९. व्यासेऽपि समानपदे । Whitney (3.68). A, B: व्यप्पपि°. Translation: Even with the separation [of words from each other by pauses in the Padapāṭha], within the same word, [an anudātta syllable following an udātta syllable is circumflexed]. Note: As Whitney notes: “By their adhikāra (ii.1 = CA 2.1.1), all rules in the second and third chapters should apply only to the saṃhitā, or combined text; hence it must here be specifically taught that in pada, as well as in saṃhitā, the syllable following an acute is enclitically circumflex, if the latter be in the same word with the former, and so not separated from it by a pause or avasāna.” The pauses between the separated words of the Padapāṭha create dis- continuous segments, and yet, as the present rule indicates, within each word unit, the same prosodic rules apply. This contrasts with the next rule, where an

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका443 avagraha, or a brief pause separating members of compound-words, does not create prosodically discontinuous segments as far as accentuation is concerned. In Whitney’s words: “Although, in the pada-text, the pause which separates each independent word from the one following it breaks the continuity of accentual influence, so that a final acute of the one does not render circumflex the initial grave of the other, yet the lesser pause of the avagraha, which holds apart the two members of a compound word, causes no such interruption; on the contrary, an acute at the end of the former member calls forth the circumflexed utterance in the first syllable of the latter member.” In my view, it is not anything in the phonetic nature of the pauses that causes this behavioral difference. As we are told by CA (3.3.35), all these different pauses are of one mora duration, and hence, as durations of silence, they are identical with each other. It must be theoretical assumptions made by the authors of the Padapāṭha that cause this difference. In one case, one is separating words from each other, in the other, only components of compound-words. The authors of the Padapāṭha have assumed that the first kind of separation creates independent units, while the second kind creates dependent units. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यासेऽपि समानपदे उदात्तात्परमनुदात्तं स्वर्यते । ‘अ॒युत॑म्’ (अ.वे. ८.२.२१)। ‘अ॒मृत॑म्’ (अ.वे. १.४.४)। ‘अ॒न्तरि॑क्षम्’ (अ.वे. २.१२.१)। ३.३.२०. अवग्रहे च । Whitney (3.69). Translation: Also, when there is a separation [with avagraha, a brief pause, of the members of compound-words, an anudātta syllable following an udātta syllable is circumflexed]. Note: See the Note on the previous rule for a distinction between separation of words by avasānas and separation of members of compounds by avagrahas. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवग्रहे च उदात्तात्परमनुदात्तं स्वर्यते। ‘सुऽसं॑शितः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१०५.२)। ‘सुऽय॑तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१११.१)। ‘सुऽशृ॑तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.७२.३)।

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 444 ‘सुऽदृ॑ढम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.२.३)। ‘सुऽभृ॑तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३९.१)। ‘सुऽहु॑तम्’ (अ.वे. ६.७१.१)। Note: All these examples occur exactly in the same order as examples 13-18 under APR (31b, p. 34). This shows that both the texts are drawing upon identical lists of examples. ३.३.२१. नोदात्तस्वरितपरम् । Whitney (3.70). Ha: °स्वरिततरं°. O: नोदात्तः°. Translation: However, [a low-pitched (anudātta) syllable], followed by a high-pitched (udātta) or a circumflex (svarita) syllable, is not [circumflexed]. Note: As Whitney explains: “A syllable originally grave remains grave before a following udātta or svarita, even though preceded by an udātta, and hence, by the last rules, regularly entitled to the enclitic circumflex.” Whitney’s theoretical conclusion is as follows: “The proclitic accent thus ap- pears, in the estimation of the Hindu phonetists, to be more powerful than the enclitic, and the law which requires the voice to plant itself upon a low pitch in order to rise to the tone of acute or independent circumflex to be more invio- lable than that which prescribes a falling tone in the next syllable after an acute.” While according to the rule of the CA, such a syllable remains merely anudātta, according to the RV notation used by many manuscripts and by the printed editions, such a syllable is marked with a horizontal subscript. In Pāṇinian terms, such a syllable becomes sannatara, with pitch lower than the low of the anudātta. The post-CA tradition of the AV reciters seems to have moved more in the direction of the RV in this respect. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न उदात्तपरं च स्वरितपरं च अनुदात्तं स्वर्यते । ‘शं न॒ आपः॑’ (अ.वे. १.६.४)। ‘यो अ॒स्य वि॒श्वज॑न्मनः’ (अ.वे. ११.४.२३)। ‘अ॒स्य सु॒तस्य॒ स्वः’ (अ.वे. २.५.२)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका445 ३.३.२२. स्वरितादनुदात्तमुदात्तश्रुतिः । Whitney (3.71): °नुदात्त उदात्त°. Translation: A low-pitched [syllable], after a circumflex, as- sumes the high-pitch [of the udātta]. Note: Whitney says: “All the other treatises (R. Pr. iii. 11, r. 18, ccv; V. Pr. iv. 138, 139; T. Pr. xxi. 10) lay down the same principle, stating also distinctly what must be regarded as implied in our precept, that not only the single grave syllable which immediately follows the circumflex receives the acute utterance, but those also which may succeed it, until, by rule 74 (= CA 3.3.25), the proximity of an acute or circumflex causes the voice to sink to the proper anudātta tone.” The significance of this rule cannot be overstated. This shows that the accentual system of the Vedic texts as they were being recited was already on its way to major collapsing of levels, and this collapse is further indicated by the traditional RV notation, also used for many AV manuscripts and all the AV editions, supports this collapsing of udātta and the syllables described in the present rule. Most other Prātiśākhyas refer to this syllable by the term pracaya, which is sometimes used as a name for a distinct accent. Pāṇini 1.2.39 (स्वरितात् संहितायामनुदात्तानाम्) provides that all low-pitched vowels after a circumflex are pronounced with ekaśruti ‘monotone.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरितात् परम् अनुदात्त[म्] उदात्त- श्रुतिर्भवति। ‘देवी॑र्द्वारो बृहतीर्विश्वमिन्वः’ (अ.वे. ५.१२. ५)। ‘माध्वी॑ धर्तारा विदथस्य सत्पती’ (अ.वे. ७.७३.४)। ३.३.२३. व्यासेऽपि समानपदे । Whitney (3.72). Translation: Even when separation [of words from each other occurs in the Padapāṭha], within the same word, [an anudātta syllable after a svarita syllable is pronounced like an udātta].

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 446 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यासेऽपि समानपदे स्वरितात्परम् अनु- दात्तम् उदात्तश्रुतिर्भवति । ‘उ॒रु॒झऽीगूला॑याः’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१३.८)। ‘क॒काटि॑काम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.२.८)। Note: The commentary cites these examples without specifically tell- ing us that these are to be understood as Padapāṭha citations, which is what they must be in order to illustrate this rule. The rule is comparable to CA (3.3.19). ३.३.२४. अवग्रहे च । Whitney (3.73). Translation: Also, when there is a separation [e.g. of the members of a compound-word with an avagraha ‘brief pause,’ an anudātta ‘low-pitched’ syllable after a svarita ‘circumflex’ syllable is pronounced like an udātta ‘high-pitched’ syllable]. Note: Whitney comments: “That is to say, again, the avagraha, or pause of division, does not interfere with the influence of the circumflex, any more than (by rule 69 = CA 3.3.20) with that of an acute, upon the following unaccented syllables.” See the Notes on CA 3.3.19-20. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवग्रहे च स्वरितात्परम् अनुदात्तमुदा- त्तश्रुतिर्भवति । ‘श्व॑न्ऽवतीः’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.९.१५)। ‘स्वः॑ऽवती’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.२०)। ‘अश्म॑न्ऽवती’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.२६)। Note: The manuscript N resumes with the word aśmanvatī. ३.३.२५. स्वरितोदात्तेऽनन्तरमनुदात्तम् । Whitney (3.74). A, B: °नंत्तर°. F, O: °नंतरमुदात्तं. Translation: Before a circumflex or a high-pitched syllable, the immediately preceding [low-pitched] syllable remains low- pitched.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका447 Note: In the system of accents as laid out by the CA, this is the only kind of syllable which remains truly anudātta after all the prosodic changes are made. The anudātta after an udātta turns into a svarita. The anudātta after a svarita turns into an udāttaśruti ‘syllable sounding like an udātta.’ Thus, the only anudātta which is left unaltered in this system is the one prescribed by this rule. However, we should note that the Pāṇinian system, cf. P.1.2.40 (उदात्त- स्वरितपरस्य सन्नतरः), treats exactly the same syllable as a sannatara syllable, i.e. syllable with a note lower than the normal level of anudātta. The RV notation used to mark the accents for the AV in printed editions and many manuscripts seems to treat this syllable more like a sannatara, if indeed this is the implica- tion of the horizontal line below the syllable. For further discussion, see the Notes on CA (3.3.18, 21, 22). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरिते च परतः उदात्ते च अनन्तर- मनुदात्तं भवति । ‘अ॒जस्तद् द॑दृशे॒ क्व॑’ (अ.वे. १०.८. ४१)। ‘इ॒दं दे॑वाः शृणुत॒ ये’ (अ.वे. २.१२.२)। ‘इ॒दमि॑न्द्र शृणुहि सोमप॒ यत्’ (अ.वे. २.१२.३)। ३.३.२६. अस्वराणि व्यञ्जनानि । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. H, I, N con- nect this with the following rule. Translation: Consonants have no accents. Note: The Sūtras beginning with CA 3.3.26 are simply listed in the manuscripts H and N, and may have either been part of the commentary itself, or may be an early interpolation. Here they are treated as Sūtras because they are found in all the Sūtra-only manuscripts. ३.३.२७. स्वरवन्तीत्यान्यतरेयः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. E, F, P: °तरेयाः. H, I, N: connect this rule with the previous one. Translation: Ānyatareya says that [consonants] do have ac- cents.

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 448 Note: For a discussion of accent-bearing consonants, see: Allen (1953: 83). ३.३.२८. किं सन्धेः स्वरितम् । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. Whitney, H, N: add भवति at the end. O, P: किं संधेस्वरितं. Translation: Which part of a combination is circumflexed? ३.३.२९. पूर्वरूपमित्यान्यतरेयः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. O: °त्यांन्यतरेयः. P: °त्यान्यतरेयाः. Translation: Ānyatareya says that it is the former constituent. ३.३.३०. उत्तररूपं शाङ्खमित्रिः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B: °मत्रिः. P: °शाख°. Translation: Śāṅkhamitri says that it is the latter constituent. ३.३.३१. किमक्षरस्य स्वर्यमाणस्य स्वर्यते । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, D, J, M, P: किमक्षरस्य स्वर्यते. The CAB on CA (1.4.2: स्वरोऽक्षरम्) cites the rules CA (3.3.31-34) as Sūtras to illustrate the use of the term akṣara. Thus, it would seem that this commentary treats these as part of the text of the CA. However, the absence of any comments on these Sūtras is perhaps an indication of their lack of full incorporation into the text of the CA. Such a situation is perhaps to be explained by an assumption that these were relatively recent interpolations into the text of the CA, and that the author of the CAB had ambivalent feelings about these rules. For further details, see the Note on CA (1.4.2). Translation: Of a syllable being circumflexed, which part is it that is circumflexed?

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका449 Note: Whitney (1862: 174) cannot locate any context for this whole discussion: “In the absence of any illustrations, I am at a loss to see to what kind of combinations this question and its answers are to be understood as ap- plying.” It would seem that it was commonplace to think of a svarita as being composed of two portions. It is also my guess that the verb svaryate is proba- bly used in the sense of ‘markedly raised,’ and that it was this raising the initial part of the svarita that was the most noticeable part of a svarita for the Indian phoneticians and Veda reciters. For further discussion, see the Note on the Bhārgava-Bhāskara-Vr̥tti on CA (1.1.16). ३.३.३२. अर्धं ह्रस्वस्य पादो दीर्घस्येत्येके । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. B, D: अर्द्धं स्वरस्य पादो°. H, N: पदौ for पादो. Most mss. read र्ह for ह्र. Translation: Some say that [the first] half of a short vowel, and the [first] quarter of a long vowel [is circumflexed]. Note: The doctrine here generally agrees the one stated in CA (1.1.17) that the first half-mora of a svarita is high-pitched. This naturally gives the first quarter of the long svarita vowel as being high-pitched. However, this general view leads to the recitation of each svarita vowel as having two distinct accents for their initial and final portions. While this is the standard view shared by most authorities, a minority opposition is voiced in the next rule by Śāṅkha- mitri. ३.३.३३. सर्वमिति शाङ्खमित्रिः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. Translation: Śāṅkhamitri says that the entire [syllable is cir- cumflexed]. Note: This rule and the next represent Śāṅkhamitri’s argument against having a svarita vowel with two parts, and he apparently proposed that the entire syllable be pronounced with a raised pitch with no falling portion. Śāṅkhamitri is a lone voice in Sanskrit phonetics, as no one else is known to have expressed the same view.

अध्याय ३, पाद ३ 450 ३.३.३४. अक्षरस्यैषा विधा न विद्यते यद् द्विस्वरीभावः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, D: °विधाने°. E, F, O: °विधानं°. Whitney: °यद् यद् विश्वरीभाव°. H, J, M, N, P: °यद् यद्विस्वरी°. A, B (corr), C, E, F, I, M (corr), O: °यद्विस्वरीभावः. B, D: °यद्यत् द्विस्वरीभावः. Translation: [Continuation of Śāṅkhamitri’s view?]: [This should be so, since] it is not the pattern of a [single] syllable to have two accents [within itself]. Note: With the reading यद् यद् विश्वरीभावः, Whitney could only say: “A renewed consideration affords me no new light upon this passage.” I believe that now there is enough manuscript support for the reading I have offered, and that it is clearly a continuation of Śāṅkhamitri’s argument why the whole of a syllable must be circumflexed, and not just its initial segment. ३.३.३५. ऋगर्धर्चपदान्तावग्रहविवृत्तिषु मात्राकालः कालः । Whitney (p. 174) quotes this as part of the commentary. Whitney, H: °पदांतनाव°. C, N: °पदांतराव°. A, B: °पदांनाव°. Translation: [The pause] at the end of a half-verse, at the end of a word [in the Padapāṭha, before the next word], the ava- graha, [e.g., the pause between the separated members of a compound-word in the Padapāṭha], and for the hiatus [in the Saṃhitāpāṭha] is of one mora duration. Note: This is a very important rule. It is important to note that the various pauses are phonetically identical, i.e. they are all stretches of silence for the duration of one mora. However, they have different theoretical and re- citational consequences. See the Note on CA (3.3.19). इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः । H, N: तृतीयस्य तृतीयपादः. C, E, F: तृतीयस्य तृतीयः पादः. A, B, D, J, M, P: तृतीयः पादः. I: इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः. O: इत्य. तृतीयस्य तृतीयः पादः ॥ ४० ॥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तृतीयस्य तृतीयः पादः ॥ ____________________________

॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ चतुर्थः पादः ॥ ३.४.१. ऋवर्णरेफषकारेभ्यः समानपदे नो णः । Whitney (3.75). Translation: Within the same word, after r̥-vowels, r, and ṣ, n is replaced with ṇ. Note: The significant point to note is that this rule makes it quite clear that the author of the CA does not attempt to cover consonantal r and vocalic r̥ under a common generalization. This is also clear elsewhere, cf. Note on CA (2.4.22). In this respect, contrast Pāṇini 8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे). In this case, Pāṇini’s rule seems to make a generic reference to r and r̥ by just men- tioning r. Elsewhere, Pāṇini’s practice is more like that of the CA, cf. Note on CA (2.4.22). For a further discussion of this issue, see Deshpande (1975: 159-60, notes 50-56). In the formulation of the rules of the CA and Pāṇini, there is another major difference. The CA rule assumes that the conditioning sound and the n that undergoes cerebralization need not be contiguous. All the examples of- fered by the CAB are of this non-contiguous type. Later rules like CA (3.4.25: व्यवाये शसलैः) and CA (3.4.26: चटतवर्गैश्च) specify that the intervention of certain sounds blocks the change of n to ṇ. In contrast with this, Pāṇini 8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे) assumes that the conditioning sound and the n undergoing the change are contiguous. With this assumption, Pānini then specifies that this change can take place even with the intervention of certain sounds, cf. P.8.4.2 (अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि). Thus, the theoretical assumptions made by these two texts are reverse of each other. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ऋवर्णाच्च रेफाच्च षकाराच्चोत्तरस्य समानपदे नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘परि॑ स्तृणीहि॒ परि॑ धेहि॒ वेदि॑म्’ (अ.वे. ७.९९.१)। ‘प॒रि॒स्तर॑ण॒मिद्ध॒विः’ (अ.वे. ९.६.२)। ‘कोषणम्’ (not in AV)। ‘तोषणम्’ (not in

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 452 AV)। समानपदे इति किमर्थम् । ‘स्वर्नयति’ । ‘प्रात- र्नयति’। Note: For parallels to the examples not attested in the AV, see the KV on P.8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे): कुष्णाति, पुष्णाति, … समानपदे इति किम् । अग्नि- र्नयति । वायुर्नयति. ३.४.२. पूर्वपदाद् द्रुघणादीनाम् । Whitney (3.76). P: °दादुघणादीनां. Translation: In drughaṇa etc., [the change of n to ṇ takes place] after [the conditioning sound in] the preceding word [i.e. preceding member of the compound-expression]. Note: The CA seems to assume a drughaṇādigaṇa. However, there is no record of this gaṇa in the APR. Whitney, in his note on this rule, lists a large number of examples of this type from the text of the Atharvaveda. P.8.4.3 (पूर्वपदात् संज्ञायामगः) teaches a similar doctrine, though it has a few addi- tional conditions. One of the conclusions to be derived from the very existence of such rules is that the process of compounding was not viewed as completely obliterating the individuality of the member words, and that the boundary be- tween the members of a compound was often a barrier to processes like retro- flexion. The fact that retroflexion did take place across such boundaries in certain compound-words, but not in others, is one of the indications of the spo- radic weakening of this boundary. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वपदस्थान्निमित्तात् द्रुघणादीनां नका- रस्य णकारो भवति । ‘द्रु॒घ॒णः’ (‘द्रु॒ऽघ॒नः,’ पद, अ.वे. ७. २८.१)। ‘सू॒ता ग्रा॑म॒ण्यः॑’(H: °ण्या) (‘ग्रा॒म॒ऽन्यः॑,’ पद, अ.वे. ३.५.७)। ‘र॒क्षो॒हणं॑ वा॒जिन॑म्’ (‘र॒क्षः॒ऽहन॑म्,’ पद, अ.वे. ८. ३.१)। ‘बृह॒स्पति॑प्रणुत्तानाम्’ (‘बृह॒स्पति॑ऽप्रनुत्तानाम्,’ पद, अ.वे. ८.८.१९)। ‘पृ॒ष॒दा॒ज्यप्र॑णुत्तानाम्’ (‘पृ॒ष॒दा॒ज्यऽप्र॑नुत्ता- नाम्,’ पद, अ.वे. ११.१०.१९)। ‘दु॒र्णि॒हि॒तै॒षिणी॑म्’ (‘दु॒- र्नि॒हि॒त॒ऽए॒षिणी॑म्,’ पद, अ.वे. ११.९.१५)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका453 Note: On the last example given by the CAB, Whitney remarks: “The latter case, we should think, is one of somewhat ambiguous quality, since in the form of the word, as given by the pada-text, there is nothing to show that dur stands in the relation of pūrvapada, or former member of a compound, to nihita, they being unseparated by avagraha.” This is not a good objection, since, as is well known, the Padapāṭha generally shows only one separation for a compound with more than two members. This is not a denial of other em- bedded compounds, but a practice based on the theoretical assumption that, at a time, we combine only two units, and the Padapāṭha only shows the final stage of such combinations. Whitney further says: “The same objection lies against the two preced- ing instances; but also the much more serious one that they are examples prop- erly belonging under rule 79 (= CA 3.4.5), below, the converted n being that of a root after a preposition.” This is also not a good objection, since the true force of CA (3.4.5: उपसर्गाद्धातोर्नानापदेऽपि) is conveyed by the phrase: नानापदेऽपि “even [when the conditioning sound appears in the preceding] separate word.” Compare the condition असमासेऽपि in Pāṇini 8.4.14 (उपसर्गादसमासेऽपि णोपदेशस्य). The present rule does relate to the preceding word, but only in the sense of the preceding member of a compound-expression. The KV on P.8.4.14 says: अस- मासेऽपीति किम् । पूर्वपदाधिकारात्समास एव स्यादिति तदधिकारनिवृत्तिद्योतनार्थम् ।. The term nānāpada in CA (3.4.5) refers to a sequence of uncompounded words. Beginning with the paraphrase of this rule, the manuscript N has miss- ing folios, except the very last folio of the manuscript. Therefore, the text of the commentary from here on is based solely on the manuscript H. ३.४.३. अकारान्तादह्नः । Whitney (3.77). Most mss. read न्ह for ह्न. Translation: [The n] of ahan [is changed to ṇ] after [the ap- propriate conditioning sound in the preceding member of the compound] ending in a. Note: As Whitney notes, “Pāṇini’s rule, viii.4.7 (ahno ’dantāt), is precisely coincident with this, and the illustrative citations of its scholiasts are in good part those which our commentator gives us, and which are all strange to the Atharvan.” One may, however, point out the intriguing contrast in the word order. A similar contrast is seen in CA (3.2.18: पूर्वपरयोरेकः) and P.6.1.84 (एकः पूर्वपरयोः). It is not immediately clear whether such changes in the word- order reflect some consistent principles, or whether they are purely accidental.

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 454 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अकारान्तात् पूर्वपदस्थान्निमित्तात् अह्नो नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘प्राह्णः’ । ‘पूर्वाह्णः’ । अकारा- न्तादिति किमर्थम् । ‘निरह्नः’(H: ह्नेः) । ‘पर्यह्नः’ । ‘दुरह्नः’। Note: All these examples are absent from the AV. Whitney points out: “Our text has only the two examples aparāhṇaḥ (ix.6.46: p. apara-ahnaḥ) and sahasrāhṇyam (e.g. 10.8.18: p. sahasra-ahnyam), and furnishes no counter-examples at all, so that the rule evidently finds its justification in the observed phenomena of the general language, and not in those of the Atharva- Veda.” For parallels to the unattested examples, see the KV on P.8.4.7 (अह्नोऽदन्तात्). ३.४.४. विभक्तयागमप्रातिपदिकान्तस्य । Whitney (3.78). A, B, D: °गमः प्राति°. Hb: °गमाप्राति°. Translation: [After the conditioning sound in the preceding member of the compound-word, the change of n to ṇ also ap- plies to the n] of a case-ending, of the augment, and, [to the n] occurring at the end of a nominal stem. Note: This rule is a close parallel to Pāṇini 8.4.11 (प्रातिपदिकान्तनुम्वि- भक्तिषु च). The rule also clearly assumes the existence of a general derivational grammar of Sanskrit, and its morphological categories. The term prātipadika, as defined by Pāṇini 1.2.45 (अर्थवदधातुरप्रत्ययः प्रातिपदिकम्), refers to the un- derived nominal stems, and, as defined by P.1.2.46 (कृत्तद्धितसमासाश्च), it covers derived nominal stems, such as verbal nouns (kr̥danta), secondary nouns derived from primary nouns through affixation (taddhita), and compounds (samāsa). The CA seems to assume the same meaning for this undefined term. The term āgama is used here as it is used by the Pāṇinian commentators to refer to adjunct items which are added to other items to become integral parts of those items. Here, the term is used to refer to n in forms like durgāṇi, where the original affix is simply i. However, by P.7.1.72 (नपुंसकस्य झलचः), the nominal stem durga gets the augment nUM, before the affix i, which, by the force of the marker M, attaches to the nominal stem after its final vowel, cf. P.1.1.47 (मिदचोऽन्त्यात् परः). The sequence durgan+i ultimately yields durgāṇi. Here, both the CA and Pāṇini seem to assume that this augment n will not be

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका455 covered by the reference to the nominal stem or the case-ending, and must be specifically mentioned. Whitney translates the term vibhakti as ‘case-ending,’ and L. Renou (1942: 495) follows Whitney in interpreting this term in the present rule as: “désigne spécialement les désinences casuelles.” However, the term theoreti- cally covers both the case-endings as well as finite verb-endings, according to the definition given by Pāṇini, cf. P.1.4.104 (विभक्तिश्च). However, the CAB gives only an example of n as part of a case-ending, and does not offer an ex- ample of n as part of a finite verb ending. If the rule is intended to derive word-internal cerebralization in a form like अति तराणि (AV 4.35.1-6), then we need to interpret the term vibhakti in a larger sense to include the verbal end- ings. Here, the affix -āni of the first person singular active imperative may need to be included in the wider notion of vibhakti. Sanskrit grammatical texts sometimes use this term in the narrower meaning of ‘case-ending,’ as for ex- ample APR (59: एकारो विभक्तयादेशश्छन्दसि). L. Renou (ibid. p. 495) also notes the wider usage of this term in the ancient grammatical literature. If the condi- tion पूर्वपदस्थान्निमित्तात् is assumed to continue into this rule, as suggested below, then we do not need this rule to account for forms like tarāṇi, and we may be correct in choosing the narrower interpretation for the word vibhakti as case- endings. There is another significant question concerning the interpretation of this rule. The commentary CAB does not expressly continue the phrase पूर्वपदस्थान्निमित्तात् into this rule. On the other hand, the KV on P.8.4.11 (प्रातिपदि- कान्तनुम्विभक्तिषु च) continues this expression into this rule. This makes one wonder whether the interpretation as offered by the commentary needs to be amended. Such a condition is needed to explain the form paryāyiṇaḥ in AV (6.76.4), which is split in the Padapāṭha as: pari-āyinaḥ. Also, in the example durgāṇi in AV (7.63.1), the Padapāṭha breaks it down to duḥ-gāni. Though the word svargeṇa is not attested in the AV, the word svarga is analyzed by the Padapāṭha as svaḥ-ga, (e.g. AV 9.5.16). In all these examples, the condition- ing sound, i.e. r, belongs to the previous member of the compound expression. Only the example varāheṇa is not split by the Padapāṭha, and hence does not present the same situation. However, the commentator may have an etymology for the word varāha in mind where the r belongs to the first member of a com- pound expression. Indeed, such an etymology is proposed by Yāska in his NR. Yāska (NR, V.4) cites a Brāhmaṇa passage: वरमाहारमहार्षीदिति हि ब्राह्मणम्, and derives the word from vara+āhāra, cf. Siddheshwar Varma (1953: 36, 171). The KV seems to assume that, if the conditioning sound is in the same word, one does not need a separate rule, but can manage with the basic rules

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 456 P.8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे) and P.8.4.2 (अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि). However, if the conditioning sound is in the previous member of the compound-word, then P.8.4.11 is needed. All the examples offered by the KV are compound-words. I suspect that the CA has a similar interpretation intended for this rule, something that is not clearly stated by the CAB, but assumed by the examples offered in it. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विभक्तिनकारस्य आगमनकारस्य प्रातिपदिकान्तस्य नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘स्वर्गेण लोकेन’ (not in known Vedic texts)। ‘व॒रा॒हेण॑ पृथि॒वी सं॑- विदा॒ना’ (अ.वे. १२.१.४८)। ‘अति॑ दु॒र्गाणि॒ विश्वा॑’ (अ.वे. ७.६३.१)। ‘नैनं॑ घ्नन्ति पर्या॒यिणः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.७६.४)। Note: The example svargeṇa lokena cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. The expression svargāṇām is found in the Kāṭhaka-Saṃhitā (33.6). ३.४.५. उपसर्गाद्धातोर्नानापदेऽपि । Whitney (3.79). B, C, D: °र्ग्रा°. O: °पदेष्वपि. Translation: After [a conditioning sound in] a pre-verb (upasarga), even if [the conditioning sound happens to be] in a separate word [i.e. uncompounded pre-verb, the n] of a verb root [is replaced with a ṇ]. Note: The phrase नानापदेऽपि in this rule has the same force as the phrase असमासेऽपि in P.8.4.14 (उपसर्गादसमासेऽपि णोपदेशस्य). For a further discus- sion of this condition, see the Note on CA (3.4.2). The other important difference between Pāṇini and the CA rule is that the CA rule is phrased as a general rule for all verbs with n. Pāṇini takes a different path. He first makes a distinction between verbs with n which is not likely to change and verbs with n which is likely to change. The second class of verbs are listed in the Dhātupāṭha already with a retroflex ṇ, and these verbs are called ṇopadeśa, verbs taught with retroflex ṇ. Then Pāṇini unconditionally converts this retro- flex ṇ to dental n, for all normal contexts, cf. P.6.1.65 (णो नः). Then, P.8.4.14

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका457 reconverts this n to ṇ, after a conditioning sound in a pre-verb. Perhaps, since the CA was concerned only with the roots as they occurred in the text of the AV, it did not feel the need to make such large classes, cf. Whitney on this rule: “The initial n of a root it almost always cerebralized by the preceding preposition in the Atharvan.” Whitney further says: “the only exceptions are the combinations of nabh with pra (vii.18.1, 2), and of nart with pari (e.g. iv.38.3) and pra (e.g. viii.6.11).” The first of these exceptions, i.e. pra+nabh is taken care by CA (3.4.18: नभेः) which was not available to Whitney. The exception of pari+nr̥t is taken care of by the inclusion of the root nr̥t in the kṣubhnādi gaṇa mentioned in CA (3.4.24: क्षुभ्नादीनाम्), and the CAB on that rule cites examples of pra+nr̥t without retroflexion of n. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्गस्थान्निमित्तात् धातुनकारस्य णकारो भवति नानापदेऽपि । ‘अ॒पः प्र ण॑यति’ (अ.वे. ९.६. ४)। ‘या ए॒व य॒ज्ञ आपः॑ प्र णी॒यन्ते॑’ (अ.वे. ९.६.५)। ‘जी॒वामृ॒तेभ्यः॑ परिणी॒यमा॑नाम्’ (अ.वे. १८.३.३)। Note: Surya Kanta says that this rule should give us a retroflexion even in pra nabhasva (AV 7.18.1, 2), pari nr̥tyati (AV 4.38.3), and parinr̥ty- antaḥ (AV 8.6.11). However, as Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) points out, all mss. retain n in all these passages. Surya Kanta concludes: “It is obvious that the CA. is prescribing saṃdhis, which must have been current in the Śaunaka school; these are not observed by the Vulgate mss.; hence Vulgate is not Śaunakīya.” The cases of pra+nabh and pari+nr̥t are now meaningfully taken care of, without the assumptions made by Surya Kanta, cf. See the Note above. ३.४.६. प्रपराभ्यामेनः । Whitney (3.80). A, B: omit प्र. O has no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. Translation: [The n] of ena [is cerebralized] after [the pre- ceding uncompounded words] pra and parā. Note: The word enaḥ clearly refers to forms of idam or etad where these two pronominal stems are substituted with ena, cf. P.2.4.34 (द्वितीया-

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 458 टौस्स्वेनः). However, while the word enaḥ in Pāṇini’s rule is a nominative from the base ena, in the present CA rule, the context requires us to read enaḥ as a genitive form, evidently from the base en. The CAB clearly takes it as a genitive: उत्तरस्य एनो नकारस्य. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्र परा इत्येताभ्यामुत्तरस्य एनो नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘प्रैणा॑ञ्छृणीहि’ (अ.वे. १०.३. २)। ‘प्रैणा॑न्वृ॒क्षस्य॑’ (अ.वे. ३.६.८)। ‘परै॑णान्दे॒वः’ (अ.वे. ८.३.१६)। प्रपराभ्यामिति किमर्थम् । ‘पर्ये॑ना(H: णा)- न्प्रा॒णः’ (अ.वे. ९.२.५)। Note: While the mss. H reads the counter-example as paryeṇān, Whitney corrects it to paryenān, without mentioning the actual reading in the mss. It is quite clear that, as the intended counter-example to the rule, it must read paryenān. However, it is to be noted that the passage as cited under APR (28, p. 26, example 13) reads paryeṇān. Whitney’s edition of the AV reads paryenān, perhaps under the influence of our CA rule. Whitney’s mss. mostly supported his reading, though there was one deviant ms. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 522) says: “O. reads páry eṇān in d; but the passage is quoted under Prāt. iii. 80 (= CA 3.4.6) as one in which the lingualization of n does not take place.” This case seems to have escaped Surya Kanta’s attention. However, it would seem that the Vulgate of the AV in this case did follow the CA rule, ex- cept the ms. O. It is also interesting to note that the commentary on the CA clearly intended to give the form paryenān, and yet the copyist, under the influ- ence of the general grammatical tradition, offered the form paryeṇān. Thus, the apparent misreading in the manuscript H may be an indication of the influence of the general rules of Sanskrit grammar on the copyists, even when the tradi- tion of the AV mss. in this case retained the non-retroflexed form. Referring to the missing rules which were not known to Whitney in 1862, he adds: “Perhaps the treatise next took note of another case which the text affords of the lingualization of the nasal of ena, viz. ā jabhārāi ’ṇām (v.31.10). Possibly there followed also a mention of the passage asr̥jan nir eṇasaḥ (ii.10.8); but this is very questionable, as the reading itself is doubtful.” In both of these examples, the VVRI edition shows that the cerebralized read- ing is supported by the majority of manuscripts.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका459 ३.४.७. नसश्च । Missing in Whitney and H. No CAB on CA 3.4.7-12. This is a case of missing text, though most likely these rules originally did have the com- mentary. This is clear from the fact that the manuscript jumps from प्रपराभ्यामेनः to पुनर्णयामसि, though there is no commentary on the latter rule. Whitney (1862: 178) tries to guess what these missing rules may have looked like: प्रपरिभ्यां नः and आशीरुरुष्यगृहेषुशिक्षेभ्यश्च. However, the missing rules, as now known from the other manuscripts are somewhat different from Whitney’s guesses. Translation: Also, [the n] of nas [= naḥ, is cerebralized after the conditioning sound in the preceding pre-verb (upasarga)]. Note: In the absence of a commentary on this rule, one can only speculate about what the rule means. As Whitney (1880: 163) has astutely noted, this rule along with the two next rules “have the aspect of representing the three items of a rule of Pāṇini, naś ca dhātusthoruṣubhyaḥ (viii.4.27).” We may perhaps also bring in the next rule of Pāṇini, P.8.4.28 (उपसर्गाद्बहुलम्). Whitney (1880: 163) assumes that the expression praparābhyām con- tinues into this rule, and then he remarks: “The first rule, nasaś ca, must mean ‘the n of naḥ also is changed to ṇ after pra and parā.’ So far as pra is con- cerned, this is well enough; the cases of pra ṇaḥ are twelve in the Atharvan. … But the text offers no example of naḥ after parā; while, on the other hand, there are eight cases … in which naḥ follows pari and is changed to ṇaḥ, all the manuscripts agreeing. The form of rule 80 (= CA 3.4.6), then, as here implied, needs absolutely to have been praparibhyām, instead of praparābhyām. How to get over the difficulty I do not see. We cannot amend rule 80 (= CA 3.4.6) to praparibhyām, because there is in the Atharvan a single case of eṇ after parā, and a single phrase (repeated) in which it remains en after pari; both are quoted by the commentator under rule 80 (= CA 3.4.6).” The other most plausible way is the follow the lead given by Pāṇini as mentioned above. If we take into account P.8.4.28 (उपसर्गाद्बहुलम्), which says that naḥ is diversely cerebralized after a conditioning sound in the preceding upasarga, a similar interpretation is suggested for the present CA rule. To get at that, we may continue the generic condition upasargāt from CA (3.4.5), in- stead of the limited condition praparābhyām. This, effectively allows us a wider interpretation for the rule to take care of the difficulties mentioned by Whitney. One may also passingly mention that the cerebralization of naḥ after pari is ascribed by the VPR (3.87: परि ण इति शाकटायनः) specifically to

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 460 Śākaṭāyana. This means that it was not a universal phenomenon, and the inci- dence of pari ṇaḥ in the AV text could possibly be due to the AV reciters fol- lowing the lead of Śākaṭāyana, as they expressly aknowledge elsewhere, cf. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.1.10). ३.४.८. धातुस्थादयकारात् । Missing in Whitney and H. F: °स्थाद्यकारात्. I: °स्थात्षकारात्. P has no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. All other manuscripts read: धातुस्थादय- कारात्. Translation: [The n of nas is cerebralized] after [the appro- priate conditioning sound] in the verb root which is not com- bined with y. Note: We do not have the commentary on this rule, and the rule seems to present major difficulties of interpretation. After discovering this rule in a second manuscript of the CA, Whitney (1880: 164) says: “There remains the rule dhātusthād ayakārāt, which can hardly signify anything else than ‘after an altering letter contained in a root, unless combined with y,’ and must be understood as applying only to naḥ. But the only case of altered n in the text falling under the rule as thus understood is śikṣā ṇo asmin (xviii.3.67) : all the manuscripts read ṇo. But the specification ayakārāt, if I interpret it correctly, can only be intended to exclude uruṣya (vi.4.3); and there all the saṃhitā MSS. save E. give uruṣyā ṇaḥ, which has accordingly been received into the edited text.” Here one may point out that the VVRI edition, while it follows Whitney in giving the reading uruṣyā ṇo, mentions two more manuscripts, B and K, as giving the reading uruṣyā naḥ. Since, we have at least three manuscripts pro- viding the reading uruṣyā naḥ, one needs to seriously consider the possibility that the author of the CA knew the reading uruṣyā naḥ, and tried to exclude it from cerebralization with the condition ayakārāt. Whitney further says: “And, on the other hand, we have mīmr̥ṣo naḥ at iii.15.4, and rīriṣo naḥ at xi.2.29, in which ṇ is not read by a single manu- script.” Even the VVRI edition does not have any manuscripts reading ṇ in these cases, and, one wonders how the present rule would exclude these, unless one makes an assumption that the author of the CA knew these examples with ṇaḥ. I am not certain we have enough evidence at this point to be able to draw any firm conclusions. One may also mention a remote possibility concerning these two in- stances. P.8.4.28 (उपसर्गादनोत्परः), as read by the MB, offers a view that naḥ

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका461 preceded by a conditioning sound in an upasarga, which is not followed by an o, changes to ṇa. The instance offered by the MB is pra+u+naḥ > pro naḥ, without cerebralization. One wonders whether the fact that the forms mīmr̥ṣo and rīriṣo end in o in the Samhitāpāṭha may have, at some point in the oral transmission, led to a similar exclusion of cerebralization of naḥ. Again, this is simply a speculation, and needs further research. The rule P.8.4.28 is read as (उपसर्गाद्बहुलम्) by the KV, and hence the text of the rule itself is to some extent uncertain. Whitney (1880: 165) discusses further possible complications with the interpretation of the term dhātusthāt, but these cannot be resolved in the present state of the manuscript variants. One may also note that the manuscript I offers a significant variant for the rule: धातुस्थात् षकारात्. If this has any validity, it may then eliminate those examples pointed out by Whitney (1880: 165), where the root contains an r as a possible conditioning sound for the change of naḥ to ṇaḥ. The only examples for dhātusthāt offered in the KV under P.8.4.27 are examples involving ṣ. However, the manuscript I is the only manuscript with this reading. ३.४.९. उरु । Missing in Whitney and H. Translation: [The n of naḥ is cerebralized after the word] uru. Note: Most manuscripts offer the reading urū. However, a compari- son of this rule with the wording of P.8.4.27 (नश्च धातुस्थोरुषुभ्यः) leads me to choose the short u reading uru. Whitney (1880: 164) points to a possible di- lemma with this rule: “The rule uru affords fewer difficulties of interpretation. But the only passage in which naḥ, or any other word beginning with n, follows uru, is uru naḥ kr̥ṇota (v.3.6), where P.M., to be sure, have ṇaḥ, but E.I.H. read naḥ, which was received into the edited text, because the passage is found also in the Rig-Veda, and is expressly exempted by the Rik. Prāt. (v. 27) from the operation of the rule requiring in general ṇaḥ after uru (v. 26). If this rule of our own treatise is to be respected, the correct Atharvan reading is uru ṇaḥ.” While the VVRI edition gives uru naḥ for its choice of reading, it men- tions several additional manuscripts which have uru ṇaḥ for this passage, i.e. A, D, Km, R, Sm. It is thus most likely, as Whitney suggests, that the original Atharvan reading known to the author of the CA was uru ṇaḥ. It was changed to uru naḥ by some reciters, perhaps under the pressure of the RV tradition.

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 462 Whitney further adds: “Possibly urūṇasau (xviii.2.13), which I had re- garded as included in the gaṇa of rule 76 (= CA 3.4.2), is to be brought under the present precept.” The drughaṇādi gaṇa mentioned in CA (3.4.2) is not listed in the APR and hence its membership cannot be verified. ३.४.१०. ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम् । Missing in Whitney and H. I: 10. O reads म्ह for ह्म. P has no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. Translation: [The n] in the forms brahmaṇvatī etc. [is changed to ṇ]. Note: Whitney (1880: 163), who found this rule in the second manu- script which became available to him after the publication of his edition in 1862, remarks: “Of the remaining rules, one, brahmaṇvatyādīnām, is clear enough in its bearing; it applies to the cases (referred to also in iv.99 = CA 4.3.28, and there rehearsed in the note) in which, against iii.89 = CA 3.4.21, a n becomes ṇ (in pada as well as saṃhitā text) even when final.” Some idea of what kind of examples are included in this class can be gained from the CAB on CA (4.3.28): चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनां च न समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘ब्रह्म॑ण्ऽवतीम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१०८.२, संहिता ! ‘ब्रह्म॑ण्वतीम्’)। ‘पश्य॑त् । अ॒क्ष॒ण्ऽवान्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.९.१५, संहिता ! ‘पश्य॑दक्ष॒ण्वान्’)। ‘शी॒र्ष॒ण्ऽवती॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.१.२, संहिता ! ‘शी॒र्ष॒ण्वती॑’)। ‘वृ॒ष॒ण्यन्ती॑ऽइव । क॒न्यला॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.५.३, संहिता ! ‘वृ॒ष॒ण्यन्ती॑व क॒न्यला॑’)। ३.४.११. निपातस्य स्वः । Missing in Whitney and H. C, E, F, I: निपातस्य°. I (corr): निपातस्वः. O: निपातस्य रवः. Remaining mss. read: निपातश्च स्वः . Translation: After [lit. ‘of’] the particle su [or rather, when it appears as ṣu, the n of naḥ changes to ṇ]. Note: The syntax of this rule is quite confusing. Whitney (1880: 163-4) says: “It appears capable of meaning only ‘of the particle su,’ while it ought to mean ‘after ṣu, when particle,’ and so to read nipātāt ṣvaḥ.” An origi- nal nipātāc ca could have been conceivably altered through scribal error to

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका463 nipātaś ca or nipātasya as we find in the manuscripts. In any case, Whitney’s guess that the rule has to do with the particle su, or when it appears as ṣu, de- rives added support from P.8.4.27 (नश्च धातुस्थोरुषुभ्यः). The rule deals with three conditions, dhātustha, uru, and ṣu. Of these three conditions, the first and the second are taken care of by CA (3.4.8-9), and the remaining ṣu is taken care of by the present rule. As Whitney (1880: 163) notes, the reference to ṣu as a nipāta is necessary to avoid cerebralization of naḥ in a case like gr̥heṣu naḥ. The rule thus takes care of the commonly found sequence ṣu ṇaḥ. The parallel rule of Pāṇini clearly applies only to naḥ after ṣu, and not to any other n-initial word after ṣu. Whitney (1880: 164), however, argues that the inter- vention of ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम् between CA (3.4.8-9) and the present rule “seems to dissociate it from naḥ, and mark it as applying to any word whatever with ini- tial n.” However we interpret the rule, there are some major problems in re- lating the rule to the phenomena found in the text of the AV. As Whitney notes: “There is then the further and not unimportant objection that no example of ṇ for n after ṣu is to be found in the text (of the AV). The altered ṣu is not once followed by naḥ; the only initial n that comes in contact with it is at xviii.1.37, where we have stuṣa ū ṣu nr̥tamāya, not a single manuscript reading ṇr̥tamāya. Unless, therefore, all the manuscripts are wrong here, and we have to alter to ṇr̥tamāya, I cannot see what purpose this rule answers.” One can only say that in this case, the author of the CA is simply attempting to imitate some generic grammar of Sanskrit, such as represented by P.8.4.27. The cases of naḥ changing to ṇaḥ after ṣu are common in the RV, and are cited by the commentators under P.8.4.27. This rule seems to have been mistakenly applied to the sequence gr̥heṣu naḥ by some transmitters. Whitney (1880: 164) says: “the phrase … occurs twice in the Atharvan, most of the manuscripts reading each time ṇaḥ. I think that, in view of the absence of authority for this reading in the Prātiśākhya, the adoption of naḥ in the edited text is to be approved.” Also see Whitney’s note on this rule (W: iii.80). ३.४.१२. पुनर्णयामसि । Whitney (3.81). While the manuscript H resumes with part of this rule, the commentary on the rule is still missing. Translation: [The n of] nayāmasi [after] punar [is changed to ṇ].

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 464 Note: The rule takes care of the sequence पुनर्णयामसि in AV (5.14.7). Beginning with CA (3.4.6), the manuscript H jumped to this rule, skipping the intermediate text: प्रपराभ्यामेर्णयामसि, and, on the basis of his knowledge of the AV, Whitney reconstructed the rule as पुनर्णयामसि. On this reconstruction, Whitney (1862: 178) remarked: “Whether I have given the form of the rule cor- rectly is not quite certain, a portion of it being lost altogether.” Now, all the newly found manuscripts of the CA support Whitney’s reconstructed text. ३.४.१३. नवतेश्च । Whitney (3.82). Translation: [The n] of the root nu [is cerebralized after pu- nar]. Note: All the examples cited by the commentator contain the word nava ‘new,’ rather than any verb-forms from the root nu. Whitney observes: “The authors of our treatise, then, must have derived nava, ‘new,’ from the verbal root nu, ‘to praise,’ instead of from the pronominal word nu, ‘now.’” Yāska’s Nirukta (III.19) derives nava from ā+nayati. Siddheshvar Varma (1953: 120) says: “But Indo-Eur. neuos, ‘new,’ Gr. néos ‘new.’” Kṣīrasvāmin’s commentary on Amarakośa (3.77) derives nava from nu, and this is further supported by his commentary Kṣīrataraṅgiṇī on Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha, which derives the words nava and praṇava from the root nu (= ṇu of the Dhātupāṭha) by applying the Uṇādisūtra : नुदंशोर्गुणश्च (rule 6.54, Daśapādī-Uṇādisūtra), Kṣīrataraṅgiṇī (p. 173). Thus, it is clear that a deriva- tion for the word nava from the root nu is well established in the Indic tradi- tion. While the word nava can be technically derived by the general rule P.3.3.57 (ऋदोरप्) by adding the affix aP to the root nu, there is no specific rule relating to the derivation of nava in Pāṇini. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नवतेश्च नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘च॒न्द्रमा॑श्च॒ पुन॑र्णवः’ (अ.वे. १०.७.३३)। ‘या रोह॑न्ति॒ पुन॑- र्णवाः’ (अ.वे. ८.७.८)। ‘पुन॒रागाः॒ पुन॑र्णवः’ (अ.वे. ८.१. २०)। Note: On AV (8.1.20), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 475) notes that the citation here is similar with RV (10.161.5), except that the RV has the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका465 vocative punarnava without a retroflex ṇ, a reading which it shares with AVP (16.2.9), as well as with Sāyaṇa’s commentary on AV (8.1.20). The lack of retroflexion in the RV reading may indicate that it is the earlier reading, rela- tively less affected by the increasingly greater pressure for retroflexion. For the question of retroflexion in the RV, see: Deshpande (1979). ३.४.१४. पूर्याणः । Whitney (3.83). E, F, I, O: दूर्याणः. Translation: [After the word] pūr, [the n of the word] yāna [is cerebralized]. Note: The compound-expression pūryāṇa (AV 18.1.54) is split into pūḥ-yāna by the Padapāṭha. Whitney observes: “There is small reason to be seen for singling out this word in order to make it the subject of a special rule, and the same is true of those treated in the two following rules: they might all have been as well left to fall into the gaṇa of rule 76.” Since this gaṇa is not fully listed in the APR, we have no exact way of ascertaining its membership as intended by the CA or by its commentators. The commentary of [Pseudo-]Sāyaṇa on AV derives the word pūryāṇa from pums+yāna, and then says that the word is grammatical because of its inclusion in the pr̥ṣodarādi gaṇa referred to in P.6.3.109 (पृषोदरादीनि यथोपदिष्टम्). However, the tradition considers this list to be an open-ended list (ākr̥tigaṇa), and this is simply a way of saying that this is an irregular forma- tion. It is unlikely that the word is actually derived from puṃs+yāna. Whitney, I think quite correctly, renders this word as “(the roads) that go to the stronghold.” In his note on AV (18.1.54), (AV Translation, Volume II, p. 828), Whitney says: “The commentary absurdly explains the word as = pumāṃso yena … yānti! for the pur, compare x.2.28 ff.; xix.17 and 19.” The phrase puram praimi appears in each verse of AV (19.17), and the phrase pu- ram pra ṇayāmi occurs in each verse of AV (19.19). Whitney, (AV Transla- tion, Volume II, p. 828), further points out, “The Anukr. takes no notice of the metrical irregularity in the verse.” To this comment, Lanman adds: “It is due to the displacement of pūrviébhis by pūryāṇais : the secondary character of the latter (occurring elsewhere only at 18.4.63 below) is palpable in more ways than one.” Commenting on pūryāṇaiḥ in AV (18.4.63), Whitney points out that MS (i.10.3) reads pūrvyebhiḥ for our pūryāṇaiḥ, while the ĀŚS (ii.7.9), “with K. and Kap. S., as pointed out by Schröder” (AV Translation , Vol. II, p. 889),

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 466 reads pūrviṇebhiḥ. One may suggest the possibility that the reading pūrviṇebhiḥ indicates a possible transition between pūrvyebhiḥ and pūryāṇaiḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पू(H: भू)रित्यस्मात् यानो नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘प॒थिभिः॑ पू॒र्याणैः॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.५४)। Note: What case is yāno in yāno nakārasya in the commentary, a genitive for yān? The rule itself simply seems to cite the word pūryāṇa in the nominative. However, probably under the influence of the clear genitive in durṇāṃnaḥ, the commentator interprets -yāṇaḥ as a genitive. For a similar question, see the note on CA (3.4.6: प्रपराभ्यामेनः). ३.४.१५. दुर्णाम्नः । Whitney (3.84). P has no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. Translation: [After] dur, [the initial n of] the word nāman [is cerebralized]. Note: The Padapāṭha splits the expression into duḥ-nāman. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दुरित्येतस्मादुत्तरस्य नाम्नो नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘दु॒र्णाम्नीः॒ सर्वाः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.१७.५)। ‘दु॒र्णामा॒ तत्र॒ मा गृ॑धत्’ (अ.वे. ८.६.१)। ‘दु॒र्णामा॒ च सु॒नामा॑ च’ (अ.वे. ८.६.४)। ३.४.१६. अवग्रहादृकारात् । Whitney (3.85). Hb: °हादकारात्. B, D: °हात् दृकारात्. Translation: After a r̥ [at the end of a] separable [member of compound, the n of the following member is cerebralized]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवग्रहात् ऋकारात् नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘दे॑व॒यानाः॑ पितृ॒याणाः॑’ (पद ! ‘पि॒तृ॒ऽयानाः॑,’ अ.वे. ६.११७.३)। ‘पि॒तृ॒याणैः॒ सं व॒ आ रो॑हयामि’ (पद

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका467 ! ‘पि॒तृ॒ऽयानैः॑,’ अ.वे. १८.४.१)। ‘नृ॒मणा॒ नाम॑’ (पद ! ‘नृ॒ऽमना॑,’ अ.वे. १६.३.५)। Note: The KV on P.8.4.26 (छन्दस्यृदवग्रहात्) cites passages with the same expressions, i.e. pitr̥yāṇa and nr̥maṇā. The KV interprets this rule to suggest that this change takes place only if the first part containing the sound r̥ is liable to be separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha. The rule does not mean that this change occurs in the Padapāṭha, even when the members are ac- tually separated with an avagraha. The Padapāṭha for these examples separates their components with an avagraha, and then does not show retroflexion, e.g. pitr̥yāṇa < pitr̥-yāna, nr̥maṇā < nr̥-manā. Thus the Padamañjarī on the KV on P.8.4.26 says: अवग्रहणभूतो य ऋकारस्तदन्तादिति । संहिताधिकाराच्च संहिताकाल एतेषां णत्वं, पदकाले चावग्रहः क्रियते, तेनावग्रहयोग्यत्वादृकारोऽवग्रह इत्युक्तः, न तु तद्दशा- पन्नः । तथा चावग्रहं दर्शयता णत्वं न प्रयुक्तम्. The commentary Nyāsa clarifies the dilemma even better: अपरे तु मन्यन्ते - यथानृत्यन्नपि नर्तनयोग्यत्वान्नर्तक इत्युच्यते, तथानवगृह्यमाणोऽपि ऋकारोऽवग्रहयोग्यत्वादवग्रह इत्युक्तः । अत एतदुक्तं भवति - अवग्रहयो- ग्यादृकाराण्णत्वं भवति, एवं सत्यवग्रहग्रहणे संहिताधिकारात् संहितायामेव णत्वं भवति, नाव- ग्रहादिति. Whitney mentions nr̥pāṇa (AV xix.58.4) as an additional example. However, neither Whitney, nor the commentator on CA, nor Pāṇini offers a counter-example, i.e. an example where n does not change to ṇ, because the previous member, though ending in r̥, is not separable with an avagraha. The wording of Pāṇini’s rule indicates that not only was he familiar with the Padapāṭhas, but that at least some of his rules were indented for building up the Saṃhitā text starting from the Padapāṭha. ३.४.१७. न मिनन्ति । Whitney (3.86): °मिनाति. E, F, I: प्रमिनंति. I (corr): °मिनातेः. O offers both readings as separate rules: प्रमिनंति ॥ नमिनंति ॥. Translation: However, [the n of] the verb mī [is not changed to ṇ after a conditioning sound in the preceding pre-verb]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न मिनन्तीत्यस्य नकारस्य णकारो भवति । ‘प्र मि॑नी॒ज्जनि॑त्रीम्’ (अ.वे. ६.११०.३)। ‘प्र

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 468 मि॑नन्ति व्र॒तानि॑’ (अ.वे. १८.१.५)। ‘प्र मि॑नाति सङ्गि॒रः’ (अ.वे. १८.४.६०)। Note: Whitney points to an additional example pramināma vratāni (xix.59.2). He further observes: “The rule itself is to be understood, it may be presumed, as giving exceptions to rule 79 (= CA 3.4.5: उपसर्गाद्धातोर्नानापदेऽपि) above: yet the latter would seem to apply only to conversions of the nasal of a root itself, and not of the appended conjugational syllable.” Whitney’s concern seems to be fully justified, especially when we find Pāṇini making a separate rule to take care of the forms prahiṇoti and pramīṇāti, cf. P.8.4.15 (हिनुमीना). This rule may be taken as an indication that under normal circumstances, the n of the infixes nu, nā etc. is not cerebralized. On the other hand, the CA rule as an exception would imply that such infixes would be cerebralized by the normal rules, unless their cerebralization is specifically prevented. This may perhaps suggest that by the term dhātu in CA (3.4.5), the author of the CA may have intended the verbal base before the final endings. This is further supported by the fact that CA (4.3.24: हिनोतेः), as well as APR (147c: हिनोतेः, p. 100), already take for granted the fact of cerebralization in forms like pratiprahiṇmaḥ, (AV 10.1.5) and simply point out that the cerebral in these forms is not restored to dental in the Padapāṭha. Neither of these treatises have a separate rule like P.8.4.15 (हिनुमीना) prescribing cerebralization of the infix. Also comparable is the prohibitory rule CA (3.4.20: परेर्हिनोतेः), which presumes that without such a rule, the cerebralization will take place in pari hinoti. All the examples cited in the CAB are found as examples 62-64 on APR (147h). ३.४.१८. नभेः । No such rule in Whitney. A, B: नेभेः. P has no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. Translation: Also, [the n] of the root nabh [is not cerebral- ized after a conditioning sound in the preceding pre-verb]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नभेश्च नकारस्य णकारो (न?) भवति । …

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका469 Note: It is difficult to understand why Whitney did not include this rule in spite of the fact that at least an incomplete commentary on this rule exists in the manuscript H. After consulting a second manuscript of the CA, however, Whitney (1880: 165) acknowledged his “want of acuteness,” and cited the examples pra nabhasva and pra nabhatām (vii.18.1, 2). Also see the Note on CA 3.4.5 concerning some misconceptions of Surya Kanta which are now corrected by the discovery of this rule. APR (147h, p. 102) lists pra nabhasva (AV 7.18.1) and pra nabhatām (AV 7.18.2) as exceptions to cerebralization, and it is obvious that these are the same cases intended by the present CA rule. ३.४.१९. भानोश्च । Whitney (3.87). P: भानोःश्च. Translation: Also, [the n] of bhānu [is not changed to ṇ after a conditioning sound in the preceding word]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - …. ‘चि॒त्र॒भा॒नो॒’ (अ.वे. ४.२५.३)। ‘प्र भा॒नवः॑ सिस्रते’ (अ.वे. १३.२.४६)। Note: The CAB offers two examples to illustrate this phenomenon. The first example seems to be a genuine example for this rule, because the cerebralization of n would otherwise take place by CA (3.4.2). One may, however, wonder why this could not be taken care of by simply excluding this instance from the drughaṇādi list referred to in that rule. The only conclusion one can draw is that the CA list was not a complete list, but simply an open- ended list hinted by the token drughaṇa. This is what occasions the present rule. On the other hand, the example pra bhānavaḥ sisrate (AV 13.2.46), as Whitney himself noted, “cannot be forced under any rule that has been laid down.” This is because, the pre-verb pra is not semantically related to bhānavaḥ, but to the verb sisrate. Therefore, there is no possibility of pra cere- bralizing the n of bhānavaḥ. One may note a curious fact, corroborating the criticism above, that the APR (147h, p. 102) lists only the example citrabhāno in its list of exceptions to cerebralization, and makes no mention of pra bhānavaḥ sisrate.

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 470 ३.४.२०. परेर्हिनोतेः । Whitney (3.88). Translation: [The n] of hinoti [is not cerebralized] after [the prefix] pari. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परेरुत्तरस्य हिनोतेर्नकारस्य णकारो [न] भवति । ‘प॒रि॒हि॒नोमि॑ मे॒धया॑’ (अ.वे. ८.४.६)। परे- रिति किमर्थम् । ‘प्र हि॑णोमि दू॒रम्’ (अ.वे. १२.२.८)। Note: The form pari hinomi (AV 8.4.6) is listed among the excep- tions to cerebralization under APR (147h, p.102). Whitney reminds us: “A strict application of rule 79 = CA (3.4.5: उपसर्गाद्धातोर्नानापदेऽपि), then, to the nasal only of a root itself, would render this rule also unnecessary.” But, then how would one get the cerebral ṇ in the attested counter-examples, where Whitney indeed admits the presence of cerebral ṇ? For theoretical issues re- lating to the assumptions behind this and other similar rules, see the Note on CA (3.4.17: न मिनन्ति). The counter-example pra hiṇomi (AV 12.2.8) is also listed under APR (147c, p. 100) among examples where in the Padapāṭha, the cerebralization does not revert to the dental original. Other forms listed are pratiprahiṇmaḥ (AV 10.1.5) and pra hiṇuta (AV 18.4.40). ३.४.२१. पदान्तस्पर्शयुक्तस्य । Whitney (3.89). E, F, O: °दांतात्स्प°. P: °स्पर्शउक्तस्य. Translation: Neither a word-final [n], nor [an n] combined with a stop [is cerebralized]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्तस्पर्शयुक्तस्य च नकारस्य णकारो [न] भवति । ‘पूष॒न् तव॑ व्र॒ते’ (अ.वे. ७.९.३)। ‘सं॒क्र- न्द॑नः’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.९)। ‘पाशो॑ ग्र॒न्थिः’ (अ.वे. ९.३.२)। Note: Whitney points out: “To the first part of this rule would need to be made the exceptions noted at iv. 99 (= CA 4.3.28: ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम्), but that, by the operation of that precept, they are made to read in pada as in saṃhitā, and so are withdrawn from the ken of the Prātiśākhya.” There is a positive

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका471 precept now in CA (3.4.10: ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम्), which was not available to Whitney when he prepared his edition which prescribes the change of word-final n in certain exceptional cases. However, we should note that in all those cases, the n occurs at the end of the first member of a compound word, and not at the ab- solute end of the word as in the case of pūṣan in AV (7.9.3) cited by the com- mentary. The first condition stated in this rule of the CA is taken care of by Pāṇini with a specific rule, P.8.4.37 (पदान्तस्य), with identical import. As far as the second condition is concerned, Pāṇini’s grammar handles the absence of cerebralization in a very different way. In an example like granthi, P.8.3.24 (नश्चापदान्तस्य झलि) converts the non-final n to an anusvāra before non-nasal stops and spirants. This form graṃthi is then changed back to granthi by P.8.4.58 (अनुस्वारस्य ययि परसवर्णः) which says that an anusvāra is replaced by a consonant homorganic with the following non-spirant consonant. By the con- vention set by P.8.2.1 (पूर्वत्रासिद्धम्), the cerebralization rule, P.8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे), considers only the results of the preceding rules as having taken effect, and does not consider the results of the succeeding rules as having taken effect. Thus, for P.8.4.1, the form granthi has not been brought into existence. It still sees the form graṃthi, to which cerebralization of n cannot apply, be- cause there is no n in that form. This complicated logic, system-internal as it is, is explained by Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita with reference to the form kurvanti in his SK on P.8.4.58 (SK, p. 29): कुर्वन्तीत्यत्र णत्वे प्राप्ते तस्यासिद्धत्वादनुस्वारे परसवर्णे च कृते तस्यासिद्धत्वान्न णत्वम्. ३.४.२२. नशेः षान्तस्य । Whitney (3.90). P: नशेषांतस्य, and no daṇḍa between this and the next rule. Translation: [The n] of the root naś, when it ends in ṣ, [is not changed to ṇ after a conditioning sound in the pre-verb]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नशेः षान्तस्य च नकारस्य न णकारो भवति । ‘प्रनष्टः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘परिनष्टः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘निर्नष्टः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। ‘दुर्नष्टः’ (not in Vedic Saṃhitās)। षान्तस्येति किमर्थम् । ‘दु॒र्णशं॑ चिद॒र्वाक्’ (अ.वे. ५.११.६)।

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 472 Note: With respect to this rule, Whitney says: “it belongs rather to the general grammar than to a Prātiśākhya of the Atharvan, since our text does not furnish a single case to which it should apply.” However, the counter-example is indeed attested in the text of the AV, i.e. durṇaśaṃ cid arvāk (AV 5.11.6), and it is possible that the existence of the counter-example occasioned the pres- ence of the rule, which, as Whitney rightly says, comes from a general gram- mar of Sanskrit. We should noted that the APR (147h, p.102), which provides a list of exception to cerebralization makes no mention of these examples, per- haps for a simple reason that they do not occur in the text of the AV. This rule is identical with P.8.4.36. For parallel examples, see the KV on P.8.4.36. An example to the contrary is found in the TS 2.4.4.1 (nirnāśaya). ३.४.२३. स्वरलोपे हन्तेः । Whitney (3.91). Translation: [The n] of the root han, when its vowel is de- leted, [is not cerebralized]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरलोपे कृते हनिनकारस्य न णकारो भवति। ‘वृ॒त्र॒घ्न स्तोमाः॑’ (अ.वे. ४.२४.१)। ‘इन्द्रे॑ण वृत्र॒घ्ना मे॒दी’ (अ.वे. ३.६.२)। स्वरलोप इति किमर्थम् । ‘र॒क्षो॒हणं॑ वा॒जिन॑म्’ (अ.वे. ८.३.१)। Note: Whitney observes: “Unless sparśayukta, in rule 89 (= CA 3.4.21), meant only ‘combined with a following mute,’ which is very unlikely, the present precept is superfluous, as merely specifying a case already suffi- ciently provided for elsewhere.” On the other hand, Whitney points out that “Pāṇini (viii.4.22: hanter at- pūrvasya) looks at this matter from the opposite point of view, and teaches that the n of han is lingualized whenever it is preceded by a.” As I pointed out in my note on CA (3.4.21), Pāṇini’s grammar does not have a rule similar to the condition स्पर्शयुक्तस्य in CA (3.4.21), but that it takes care of the same phenomenon in a different way. However, the method used in Pāṇini’s grammar to avoid the cerebralization of n in a form like kur- vanti cannot apply to the example vr̥traghna. Here, the n of the root cannot be first converted to an anusvāra, and then back to n, invisible to the cerebraliza- tion rule P.8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे). Therefore, Pāṇini’s formulation of

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका473 P.8.4.22 (हन्तेरत्पूर्वस्य) remains significant in restricting cerebralization of n in the root han only to those instances where the n is preceded by an a. Such in- deed is not the case with the present CA rule. Therefore, Whitney’s criticism of it still remains valid. ३.४.२४. क्षुभ्नादीनाम् । Whitney (3.92). O: क्षुभ्णादीनां. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a cor- rection. Translation: [The n] of the forms of kṣubh etc. [is not cere- bralized]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - क्षुभ्नादीनां च नकारस्य न णकारो भवति । ‘क्षुभ्नाति’ । ‘प॒रि॒ नृत्य॑न्त्योरिव’ (अ.वे. १०.७. ४३)। ‘मधु॑ना॒ प्रपी॑नाः’ (अ.वे. १२.३.४१)। ‘परि॑ नृत्यन्ति के॒शिनीः॑’ (अ.वे. १२.५.४८)। Note: The fact that there is no attested example of the root kṣubh in the Vulgate of the AV is taken as an indication by Surya Kanta (APR, Intro- duction, p. 39) that the Vulgate is not genuinely Śaunakīya, and that such ex- amples may have occurred in a genuinely Śaunakīya recension. I tend to agree with Whitney that the similarity of this rule with Pāṇini (viii.4.39: क्षुभ्नादिषु च) suggests that the CA is relying here upon a source which dealt primarily with the general grammar of Sanskrit. Also see my Note on CA (3.4.5). ३.४.२५. व्यवाये शसलैः । Whitney (3.93). O: °शषलैः. Translation: [The cerebralization of n due to the preceding r, r̥, and ṣ does not take place] when there is an intervention by [the sounds] ś, s, and l. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यवाये शकारसकारलकारैः नकारस्य न णकारो भवति । ‘कः पृश्निं॑ धे॒नुम्’ (अ.वे. ७.१०४.१)।

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 474 ‘गर्भे

॑ अ॒न्तरदृ॑श्यमानः’ (अ.वे. १०.८.१३)। ‘स॒वि॒ता प्र॑स॒- वाना॑म्’ (अ.वे. ५.२४.१)। Note: In comparison with this rule, and the following rule, of the CA, Pāṇini’s grammar takes a wholly different strategy. For a discussion, see my Note on CA (3.4.1). ३.४.२६. चटतवर्गैश्च । Whitney (3.94). A, B, D, J, M, P: चटवर्गैश्च. Translation: Also, [there is no cerebralization of n if the pre- ceding conditioning sound is separated by stops belonging to] the c-series, ṭ-series, and t-series. Note: For a further discussion of the formulation of this rule, and its contrast with Pāṇini’s grammar, see my Note on CA (3.4.1). Also see the Note below. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चटतवर्गैश्च व्यवाये नकारस्य न णकारो भवति। ‘उपे॒होप॑पर्चना॒स्मिन् गो॒ष्ठ उप॑ पृञ्च नः’ (अ.वे. ९.४.२३)। ‘रेषयैनान्’ (अ.वे. ११.१.२०)। ‘यथा- सो॑ मित्र॒वर्ध॑नः’ (अ.वे. ४.८.६)। ‘तं व॑र्त॒निः’ (अ.वे. ७. २१.१)। Note: Referring to the example reṣayainān, Whitney correctly ob- serves: “this, however, is no example under the rule.” Later, he (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 616) observed that even though the commentary ms. reads reṣayainān, the fact that it is “quoted as an example of a palatal or lingual or dental mute interposed between r and n, which would imply recaya. ∀That is, it implies the mute (c) rather than the sibilant (ś), the intervention of which was treated in the preceding rule, iii. 93 (= CA 3.4.26).#” It should be noted that while several mss. offer the variant reśaya, none offers the reading recaya. The rules 3.4.25-6 provide a statement which is dif- ferent from that of P.8.4.2 (अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि). Pāṇini’s rule lists those sounds whose intervention does not prevent the change of n to ṇ. On the other hand, the CA lists those sounds whose intervention prevents this change. This

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका475 shows a certain difference in the orientation of these two texts. Also, the initial rule in Pāṇini, i.e. P.8.4.1 (रषाभ्यां नो णः समानपदे) assumes that the procedure applies only to n immediately preceded by r and ṣ. Then the next rule, P.8.4.2, allows this procedure to situations with intervention of certain sounds. On the other hand, the initial rule in CA seems to assume that n changes to ṇ as long as it is somehow preceded by r and ṇ. Then the text stipulates that this change does not take place if certain sounds intervene. Whitney offers an excellent explanation of why the intervention of these sounds prevents cerebralization of the following n: “The physical expla- nation of the effect of the sounds mentioned in these two rules to prevent the lingualization of the nasal is obvious: they are all of them such as cause the tongue to change its position. When this organ is once bent back in the mouth to the position in which the lingual sibilant, semivowel, and vowels are uttered, it tends to remain there, and produce the next following nasal at that point, in- stead of at the point of dental utterance; and it does so, unless thrown out of adjustment, as it were, by the occurrence of a letter which calls it into action in another quarter.” ३.४.२७. पदेनावर्जितेन । C, E, F, I, Hcb, O: °तेन. Whitney (3.95) and the rest of the manu- scripts: °ते च. Translation: With [the intervention] of a [whole] word [between n and the conditioning sound, there is no cerebraliza- tion], unless [the intervening word is] ā. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य- पदेन आकारवर्जितेन व्यवाये नकारस्य न णकारो भवति । ‘परी॒मे गाम॑नेषत’ (अ.वे. ६.२८.२)। आकारवर्जितेति किमर्थम् । ‘प॒र्याण॑द्धम्’ (अ.वे. १४.२. १२)। Note: Whitney points out that “Pāṇini, however, takes due note of it (viii.4.38: padavyavāye ’pi), but omits to except the preposition ā, so that (unless he makes the exception by some other rule which I have not observed) he would read paryānaddha.”

अध्याय ३, पाद ४ 476 We should note that the VVRI edition provides the reading paryāṇad- dham, but notes that a large number of manuscripts have the reading paryānad- dham without the cerebralization of n. ३.४.२८. तुविष्टमः । Whitney (3.96). I: 29. O: तुविष्टभः. Translation: The form tuviṣṭama [from tuvi+tamaḥ is cor- rect]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तुविष्टम इति सकारागमो भवति । ‘इन्द्रः॒ पति॑स्तु॒विष्ट॑मः’ (अ.वे. ६.३३.३)। संहितायामित्येव। (क्रम !) ‘तु॒वित॑म॒ इति॑ तु॒विऽत॑मः’ । अनधिकारे सूत्र- निर्देशः । सूत्रार्थस्तद्यो(H: र्द्या)गश्च चर्चापरिहारयोर्वचनं मा भूदिति । Note: The comment अनधिकारे सूत्रनिर्देशः । सूत्रार्थस्तद्योगश्च चर्चापरिहार- योर्वचनं मा भूदिति indicates that the commentator has indeed thought about the organization of the rules in the CA. Whitney renders the first part of this comment as: “in the absence of an explanatory heading.” A better rendering would be, “the rule is enunciated in an inappropriate section.” The reason for the deviation is then given in the following comment. Whitney, however, makes a significant observation: “The same word is found more than once in the Rig-Veda, but is written by the pada-text tuviḥ-tama, so that there is nothing irregular in the saṃhitā form, and it requires and receives no notice from the Rik Prātiśākhya. It is a legitimate matter for surprise to find the rule thrust in this place, in connection with a subject to which it stands in no relation whatever: we should expect to meet it in the second chapter, along with rules 25 and 26 of that chapter, or after rule 30, or elsewhere. Its intrusion here, and the indefiniteness of its form, cannot but suggest the suspicion of its being an interpolation, made for the purpose of supplying an observed deficiency in the treatise.” However, it must be a very early interpolation, since it is found in all the manuscripts, and also since the commentary CAB comments upon this rule, even though it is evidently unhappy with its location. इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः । तृतीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका477 H: ॥१०५॥ इति तृतीयोध्यायः. O: इति तृतीयोध्यायः. E, F: तृतीयस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥ आथर्वणे चतुराध्यायिकायां तृतीयोध्यायः. A, B, D, P: तृतीयोध्यायः समाप्तः. I: इति तृतीयाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥४॥ इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकायां तृतीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ सू १२५. O: इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकायां तृतीयस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥ तृतीयोऽध्यायः समाप्तः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥२९॥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥१०५॥ इति तृतीयोऽध्यायः ॥ Note: Note the different numbers of the rules in this Adhyāya given in the colophons for H and I. This suggests that there is a difference of opin- ion regarding 20 statements, which are regarded as part of the Sūtra-text by some manuscripts, while they are not considered to be part of the Sūtra-text by others. Especially, the manuscript of the CAB, H, shows the smaller number. Thus, it is clear that while this mss. contains all these extra-passages, without any commentary upon them, they are not counted as being part of the Sūtra- text. Whether they were part of the commentary, and therefore were not com- mented upon again, or whether they were included under the influence of the other text-tradition seen in the rest of the manuscripts is not clear. ______________________________

॥ चतुर्थोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ प्रथमः पादः ॥ ४.१.१. समासावग्रहविग्रहान्पदे यथोवाच छन्दसि शाकटायनः । तथा प्रवक्ष्यामि चतुष्टयं पदं नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातानाम् ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. C: no such verse. A, B, D, J, K: °विग्रहां°. P(orig): °समासावग्रहां पदे° corrected to °समासावग्रहविग्रहां पदे°. Whitney: °तथा वक्ष्यामि°. A, B, D: °पसर्ग्र°. The verses which are given hear as CA 4.1.1-23 either formed part of the commentary, or were a very early interpolation into the text. In any case, they are found in all Sūtra-only manuscripts and were accepted as being part of the text of the CA. The only manuscript which does not contain these verses (CA 4.1.1-23) is C. Whether it represents an older tradition of the Sūtra-text, going to a time before these verses were incorporated, or whether it simply left them out, is difficult to say. It does not provide a count of the rules either for this Pāda or the Adhyāya, and, therefore, we do not know what to make of this omission. To confuse the matter further, the mss. C does include other passages in the 3rd Pāda of the 3rd Adhyāya which are left out by Whitney as belonging to the commentary. Thus, most probably, this represents an eclectic decision on the part of someone to leave out these verses. Translation: As Śākaṭāyana has explained for the Veda, the compounding, the disjoining of the compounded expressions, and the separation of words in the Padapāṭha, so will I explain the fourfold word - noun, verb, pre-verb, and particle. Note: As for the structure of this passage, Whitney (1862: 184, fn) says: “With the slight alteration of yatho’vāca to yathā”ha, we should have here three equal successive pādas of a metrical verse: but the impossibility of forc- ing the last compound into any such metrical form, as a fourth pāda, renders it very doubtful whether this is anything more than a curious coincidence, and whether the words are not meant for simpler prose.” With all the mss. variants

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका479 at hand, it is still not possible to restore the correct metrical form of this pas- sage, if indeed it had any originally. ४.१.२. आख्यातं यत्क्रियावाचि नाम सत्त्वाख्यमुच्यते । निपाताश्चादयोऽसत्त्व उपसर्गास्तु प्रादयः ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. C: no such verse. Translation: The word which expresses action is the verb. The word which names an object is said to be a noun. Words like ca, when they do not refer to an object, are particles. How- ever, words like pra are pre-verbs. Note: The verse represents a mixture of the doctrines which are found in diverse texts like Pāṇini’s grammar, Yāska’s NR, and other Prāti- śākhyas. The definitions of verb and noun given here are more in line with those given by the NR (p. 23): भावप्रधानमाख्यातम्, सत्त्वप्रधानानि नामानि. Also see RPR (12.17-19): तन्नाम येनाभिदधाति सत्त्वम्, तदाख्यातं येन भावं सधातु. Patañjali’s MB (MLBD edn., Vol.II., p. 625) uses kriyā instead of bhāva : क्रियाप्रधानमाख्यातं भवति । द्रव्यप्रधानं नाम. Pāṇini, on the other hand, offers non- semantic formal definitions for the categories of noun and verb, cf. P.1.2.45 (अर्थवदधातुरप्रत्ययः प्रातिपदिकम्), P.1.2.46 (कृत्तद्धितसमासाश्च), P.1.3.1 (भूवादयो धातवः). For a detailed discussion of the differences between these definitions, see: Deshpande (1992: 10-15). The definition of nipāta reminds us of P.1.4.57 (चादयोऽसत्त्वे), and the definition of upasarga by referring to a list be- ginning with pra reminds us of P.1.4.58 (प्रादयः) and P.1.4.59 (उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे). However, we must keep in mind that the categories of nipāta and upasarga are not exclusive categories for Pāṇini, and both of these are ulti- mately subsumed for him in the category of prātipadika ‘nominal stem.’ For details, see the Note on CA (1.3.18). The fourfold division, on the whole, rep- resents a non-Pāṇinian tradition, though it is referred to and utilized by the post-Pāṇinian grammarians commenting on Pāṇini, cf. Deshpande (1992: 13ff). ४.१.३.नाम नाम्नानुदात्तेन समस्तं प्रकृतिस्वरम् । न युष्मदस्मद्वचनानि न चामन्त्रितमिष्यते ॥

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 480 Whitney (p. 261): °नाम्नानुदात्तेन° quoted as part of the commentary. A, B: Daṇḍa after °मुदात्ते. C: no such verse. Most mss. read: नाम्नामुदात्तेन. How- ever, I agree with Whitney’s emendation to °नाम्नानुदात्तेन°, though Whitney does not call it an emendation. His ms. actually reads नाम्नामुदात्तेन. Translation: A noun, brought together with an unaccented noun, retains its natural accent. However, not desired [in this context] are (enclitic) forms of yuṣmad or asmad, or a vocative. Note: Whitney (1862: 263) interprets the first half of the verse to mean: “a noun which has its natural accent is compounded with another which is unaccented.” As examples of the first part of this verse, Whitney says: “thus we must combine tri : saptā́ḥ (i.1.1), śatá : vr̥ṣṇyam (i.3.1), into tri-ṣaptā́ḥ, śatá- vr̥ṣṇyam.” I have a slightly different understanding of the term samastam. In my opinion, the term does not refer to compounding as it is understood in a limited sense in the Pāṇinian grammar, but it probably is equivalent to the wider post- Pāṇinian conception of vr̥tti as found in Kātyāyana, Patañjali, and the later grammarians like Bhartr̥hari. It becomes inclusive of the traditional notion of compounding (samāsa), but additionally includes processes like the addition of the taddhita and kr̥t affixes, and the formation of secondary verbs. In some of these cases, the Padapāṭha does not completely isolate the items, but separates their members with an avagraha. For a discussion of this conception of vr̥tti, in the context of Padapāṭha, see K.V. Abhyankar (1974: 5ff). Thus, we can point to áṅge aṅge (AV 1.12.2) as a positive example of this rule. Here, the Padapāṭha treats these two as members of a compound- expression and separates them only with an avagraha: áṅge-aṅge. On the other hand, consider the following counter-examples. In vásoṣpate (AV 1.1.2), the unaccented pate is a vocative, and the Padapāṭha does not treat this as a com- pound word: vásoḥ / pate /. Similarly, the unaccented enclitic forms of asmad and yuṣmad, such as te and naḥ, are not treated by the Padapāṭha as forming a compound-expression with the preceding accented noun: ténā te (AV 1.3.3) : Pada - téna / te; tā́ naḥ (AV 1.4.2) : Pada - tā́ḥ / naḥ. ४.१.४. नामानुदात्तं प्रकृतिस्वरो गतिरनुच्चो वा नाम चेत्स्यादुदात्तम् । Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B: °वेश्या° for °चेत्स्या°. C: no such rule.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका481 Translation: An unaccented noun and a naturally accented particle [= gati, are treated in the Padapāṭha as a compound- expression]. Or, if the noun is accented, then with an unac- cented particle, [it is treated as a compound-expression in the Padapāṭha]. Note: The term gati is repeatedly used by these rules without strictly defining it. It is defined by P.1.4.60-79 as applying to a whole host of prepo- sitions and particles, and particle-like items, compare the expression upasarga- vr̥tti ‘items which behave like an upasarga’ in CA (4.1.22). We may offer the following examples to illustrate the teachings of this rule. In úpahūtaḥ (AV 1.1.4), the accented particle úpa is compounded with the unaccented hūtaḥ, cf. Padapāṭha : úpa-hūtaḥ. On this expression, the com- mentary of [Pseudo-]Sāyaṇa says: ‘गतिरनन्तर’ (पा.६.२.४९) इति गतेः प्रकृतिस्वर- त्वम् । ‘उपसर्गाश्चाभिवर्जम्’ (फिट्सूत्र ४.१३) इत्युपशब्द आद्युदात्तः. In niṣécanam (AV 1.3.1), the unaccented ni is compounded with the accented word sécanam, cf. Padapāṭha : ni-sécanam. In this example, by P.6.2.139 (गतिकारकोपपदात् कृत्), the word sécana is allowed to retain its derivational accent, and the particle ní loses its original accent and becomes unaccented. While Pāṇini’s grammar, as part of its derivational process, teaches us how an item which is ‘originally’ (prakr̥tisvara = lexical accent) accented can lose its accent in the process of being combined with other words in compounding etc., the Prātiśākhya simply looks at the result that the particle ni in the example cited above is unaccented. While the Prātiśākhya does not clearly specify the circumstances under which a particle may lose its accent, it does have the conception of its original or lexical accent. ४.१.५. क्रियायोगे गतिः पूर्वः समासो यावन्तोऽनुच्चाः समर्थास्तान्समस्येत् । Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. Whitney, H: °समर्थांस्तान्°. Whitney, H, J: °समस्यते. E, F, I: Daṇḍa after क्रियायोगे. A, B: °समासोर्या°, °स्तात्समस्येत्. C: no such rule. O: °गतिपूर्वः°. Translation: A preceding [unaccented] particle (gati) is com- pounded with a verb. As many semantically related unaccented particles there may be, they should all be compounded [with the following verb].

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 482 Note: The verse here deals with the compounding of the pre-verbs with finite verbs. Thus, a proper example may be pariyánti (AV 1.1.1), where an unaccented pari is compounded with an accented verb: Padapāṭha : pari- yánti, with an avagraha indicating that this is a compound-expression. On this expression, the commentary of [Pseudo]-Sāyaṇa says: उदात्तवता तिङा गतेः समासवचनमिति परिशब्दस्य तिङन्तेन समासः । ‘तिङि चोदात्तवति’ (पा.८.१.७१) इति गतेरनुदात्तत्वम्. An accented pre-verb is not compounded with the following unaccented verb. The second part of the verse lays down a rule which, as far as I under- stand, is repeated in part in CA (4.1.6) and CA (4.1.24: अनेकोऽनुदात्तेनापि). The CAB on CA (4.1.24) offers a number of examples, where several unaccented pre-verbs, followed by an accented pre-verb, are all compounded with the fol- lowing verb form: चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनेक उपसर्गः अनुदात्तेनापि आख्यातेन सह समस्यते। ‘उ॒त्ऽअव॑स्यति’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.६.५४, VVRI edn.: ९.११.६)। ‘स॒म्ऽ- आचि॑नुष्व । अ॒नु॒ऽस॒म्प्रया॑हि’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.३६)। ‘उ॒प॒ऽस॒म्परा॑न(H: ण)यात्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.४.५०)। उपसर्गवृत्तिभिश्च । ‘अ॒च्छ॒ऽआव॑दामसि’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.३८.३, VVRI edn.: ७.३९.३)। ‘अ॒भि॒ऽहिङ्कृ॑णोत’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३.३७)। The present rule, as well as CA (4.1.24), seem to also allow a host of unaccented pre-verbs to be compounded with an accented verb. However, all the instances in the CAB on CA (4.1.24) are of unaccented verb preceded by an accented pre-verb, preceded by one or more unaccented pre-verbs. We need to find instances in the AV of an accented verb compounded with a plurality of unaccented pre-verbs. A.A. Macdonell (1916: 469) offers an instance of this type: pariprayāthá (RV 4.51.5), RV-Padapāṭha : pari-prayāthá. It seems that such an instance is difficult to find in the AV, in view of the APR rule (12c, p. 11), which says that when an accented verb is preceded by two upasargas, the first of them is isolated as a separate word. All the instances offered under this rule have the first upasarga, treated here as a karmapravacanīya and is accented, e.g. abhí vipáśyāmi (AV 12.1.33). ४.१.६.यत्रानेकोऽनुदात्तोऽस्ति परश्च प्रकृतिस्वरः । आख्यातं नाम वा यत्स्यात्सर्वमेव समस्यते ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, D, M: °प्रकृतिः स्वरः°. E, F, I, O: यत्रानेकोप्यनुच्चोस्ति°. C: no such verse.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका483 Translation: Where there is more than one unaccented [particle/preverb = gati], and where the following [word? particle/preverb = gati ?] retains its original accent [i.e. remains udātta], the following verb or noun is compounded with all these. Note: Examples of unaccented verbs, compounded with the preced- ing accented upasarga, preceded further by one or more unaccented upasargas, are found in the CAB on CA 4.1.24: अ॒नु॒ऽस॒म्प्रया॑हि’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.३६)। ‘उ॒प॒ऽस॒म्परा॑नयात्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.४.५०)। As I have indicated by the question-mark in my translation, the phrase paraś ca prakr̥tisvaraḥ could perhaps mean ‘where the following word retains its original accent,’ and this may be taken to refer to the following verb or noun maintaining its original accent. In my Note on the previous rule, I have men- tioned that the APR rule (12c, p. 11) seems to be against the possibility of an accented verb being compounded with more than one unaccented pre-verb. However, we do find examples of a plurality of unaccented pre-verbs com- pounded with a verbal noun, if we include a gerund among verbal nouns: abhyudétya (AV 15.11.2), Padapāṭha : abhi-udétya. This is a combination of abhi+ud+ā with the gerund form ítya, which retains its accent in the com- pound-expression. ४.१.७.सोपसर्गं तु यन्नीचैः पूर्वं वा यदि वा परम् । उदात्तेन समस्यन्ते तथैव सुप्रतिष्ठितम् ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. H, J, M, P: °यदि वा परः°. D, E, F, I, O, P: °यथैतत्सुप्रतिष्ठितं. I: °समस्येते°. C: no such verse. D omits उदात्तेन समस्यन्ते. Translation: An unaccented word, accompanied by a pre- verb, is compounded with an [another?] accented [preverb], [irrespective of?] whether [the accented preverb] is the first one or the second one. Thus is the example súpratiṣṭhitam. Note: This is verse 5 in Whitney’s (1862: 263) text, and he says: “Verse five has for its subject such compounds as are instanced by súpratiṣṭhitam (xii.1.63 : p. sú-pratiṣṭhitam.” Here, prati+ṣṭhitam is unaccented and is compounded further with the accented preverb sú. As an instance illus- trating the second upasarga being the accented one, we can cite upā́kr̥tam (AV

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 484 2.34.2), Padapāṭha : upa-ā́kr̥tam. Here, the basic word, kr̥tam is unaccented. However, of the two upasargas, it is the second one which is the accented upasarga, in contrast with the example súpratiṣṭhitam. ४.१.८.उदात्तस्तु निपातो यः सोऽनुदात्तः क्वचिद्भवेत् । समस्यन्ते तथाविधमितिहासो निदर्शनम् ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. H, I: °विधिः मिति°. D, O: °समस्यते°. E, F, O: °यथाविधमिति°. Others: °तथाविधिमिति°. C: no such verse. O: °सानुदात्तः°. Translation: A particle which is [normally] accented can oc- casionally become unaccented, and as such is compounded. An instance of that kind is itihāsáḥ. Note: The word itihāsáḥ (AV 15.6.4) is analyzed by the Padapāṭha as itiha-āsáḥ. The lexical accent of iti is íti, and the ha is lexically unaccented. However, the item íti loses its accent in the process of compounding. ४.१.९.नघारिषां सुसहेत्येवमादीन्युदाहरेत् । सहेत्यनेनानुदात्तं परं नाम समस्यते ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. Whitney: °सुसहे°. B, D: °सहसहे°. C: no such verse. O: °सहेत्येनानुदात्तं°. P: नघरिषां°. All other mss. read ससहे°, and Whitney reads °सुसहे°, though his manuscript actu- ally reads ससहे°. In any case, in spite of the fact that no manuscript directly supports it, I believe that Whitney’s emendation offers the correct original reading, and I have adopted it in the text of the verse. Also see the Note below. Translation: [Additionally, for the preceding rule], one should offer examples such as naghāriṣā́m and súsaha. [The next rule:] An unaccented noun is compounded with the pre- ceding sahá. [Examples in the next verse ab.] Note: The form naghāriṣām occurs in AV (7.7.6). Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., 499) remarks: “The mss. again are much at variance as to the reading of naghāriṣā́m, Bp.I.M.p.m.E.p.m.O. read !Bp. with -ghă-∀ naghā- r̥ṣā́m. !Ppp. reads naghāriṣām (as does Berlin ed.).∀”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका485 The reading found in most mss., i.e. sasahe° makes no sense in this context, and probably represents the confusion of susaha and sasahe, enhanced by the presence in the AV of the form sasahe (AV 1.16.3; 2.5.3). However, this is a verb form with reduplication, and does not illustrate anything in the present context. The examples naghāriṣā́m (AV 8.2.6, 7.6) and súsaha (AV 6.64.3) are intended to illustrate the rule given in the previous verse. Normally, ná is an accented particle, but it loses its accent in the first example. Similarly, sahá is normally accented on the last syllable. However, it loses its accent in the compound-expression súsaha. ४.१.१० अनुदात्तेन चोदात्तं सभावो यत्र चोच्यते । सहसूक्तवाकः सान्तर्देशाः शतक्रतो [सकृतौ?] निदर्शनम् ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. E, F, I, O: °चोदात्तमभावो°. C: no such verse. O: °सातदेशाः°. Other mss. read स्वभावो. The reading सभावो is my emendation. See the Note below. Translation: [Continuing the previous topic of compounding of sahá]: And, where the change [of sahá] to sa is taught, an accented word is compounded with the unaccented [sa]. The illustrations are sahásūktavākaḥ, sā́ntardeśāḥ, and śatakrato. Note: I have translated the first part of the verse, assuming the emen- dation sabhāvo referring to the change of sahá to sa. In my opinion, the manu- script readings codāttaṃ svabhāvo and codāttam abhāvo are corruptions for codāttaṃ sabhāvo, because the copyists could not understand the word sabhāvo, and replaced it with the more familiar words, which actually make no sense in the context. The examples sahásūktavākaḥ (AV 7.97.6) and sā́ntardeśāḥ (AV 9.5. 37) illustrate the two types of combinations. In the first combination, the accented word sahá is combined with the unaccented sūktavākaḥ. In the sec- ond combination, the unaccented sa is combined with the accented ántardeśāḥ, cf. Padapāṭha : sa-ántardeśāḥ. As for the example śatakrato (AV 14.1.41), Whitney (1862: 263) comments: “śatakrato is also added, but apparently only by a blunder; or rather, the reading is probably false and corrupt, as the metre helps to show.” All the manuscripts have this reading, and yet the reading makes no sense in this context. I would like to suggest that śatakrato is an an- cient error of a copyist for sakŕ̥tau (AV 11.1.10) which is analyzed by the

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 486 Padapāṭha as sa-kŕ̥tau, a compound of an accented word with the unaccented sa for sahá. This copyist’s error must be truly ancient to get into all the available manuscripts. This may indicate that ultimately all our existing manuscripts go back to a common source which had this error. ४.१.११.अनुदात्तो गतिर्मध्ये पूर्वपरौ प्रकृतिस्वरौ । पूर्वेण विग्रहस्तत्र पुरुषेऽधि समाहिते ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, D, P: अनुदात्तानुगति°. Other mss. read: अनुदात्तोऽनुगतिर्मध्ये. Whitney’s emendation: अनु- दात्तो गतिर्मध्ये°, °समाहितः. C, E, F, I, O: in a different location. J: no such verse. I have adopted Whitney’s emendation over the manuscripts. The reading अनु- दात्तोऽनुगतिः probably developed due to the scribal confusion with उदात्तोनुगतिः in the next verse. The prevalence of this confusion in most manuscripts also hints at its presence in the archetype from which probably all our surviving manuscripts are derived. For a similar phenomenon, see my Note on the preceding verse. Translation: Where there is an unaccented pre-verb [= gati] in between the preceding and the following [pre-verbs], both of which have their natural accent [udātta], the first of these is iso- lated [in the Padapāṭha as a separate word], for example: púruṣé ’dhi samā́hite (AV 10.7.15). Note: In the example cited by the verse, there are three pre-verbs [gati, upasarga], such that the first and the third are udātta, while the second one is unaccented, i.e. ádhi+sam+ā́. The verse says that in such a sequence, the first preverb is isolated in the Padapāṭha as an independent word, namely that it is not treated as part of a compound. This is confirmed by the Padapāṭha. Here, one may say that ádhi is syntactically related to púruṣe, rather than with samā́hite, and, hence, to use the Pāṇinian terminology, it is a true preposition (karmapravacanīya), rather than a preverb (upasarga). Both categories are sub- sumed under the wider category of gati in the Pāṇinian grammar, as is appar- ently the case with these verses. The phrase púruṣé ’dhi samā́hitāḥ appears in the same verse. The grammatical theory as expressed in the verse pays atten- tion only to the sequence of accented or unaccented items, but does not seem to pay much attention to the syntactic component.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका487 ४.१.१२.उदात्तोऽनुगतिर्यत्रानुदात्तं परं पदम् । पूर्वेण विग्रहस्तत्र संसुभूत्या निदर्शनम् ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. B, D, M: उदात्तौ नु गतिर्यत्रा°. E, F, J: अनुदात्तोनुगतिर्यत्रा°. C: no such verse. O, P: उदात्तो- नुगति°. Others: उदात्तानुगति. The meter requires a hiatus: यत्र अनुदात्तं. Translation: Where an accented [pre-verb, particle, gati] is followed by a pre-verb, and where the following word is unac- cented, in such a case, the first [pre-verb, particle, gati] is iso- lated [in the Padapāṭha as a separate word], for example: sáṃ súbhūtyā (AV 3.14.1). Note: Whitney (1862: 263) describes this verse as: “where two ac- cented prepositions precede an unaccented noun, the former of them is to be made independent.” The Padapāṭha for the example reads: sám / sú-bhūtyā /. The verse does not clearly say that both the pre-verbs must be accented. How- ever, given that the noun is said to be unaccented, this makes the compounded pre-verb an accented item. We should note that, the logic of this verse is not entirely clear. The actual practice of the AV Padapāṭha, which is also corroborated by 54 exam- ples listed under APR (10, pp. 9-11), seems to provide a somewhat generalized rule. When an accented or unaccented verbal noun (kr̥danta) is preceded by two upasargas, with the first one being an accented upasarga / karmaprava- canīya, it is isolated as a separate word in the Padapāṭha. For instance, ápa dur- matím (AV 14.2.6). Here, dur is unaccented, matím is accented, and yet the Padapāṭha isolates ápa as an independent word. There are a large number of examples of this kind. ४.१.१३.यत्रोभे प्रकृतिस्वरे पूर्वं यच्च परं च यत् । वर्जयित्वाद्युदात्तानि सर्वमेव विगृह्यते ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. E, F, O: यत्रो- भेदप्रकृतिस्वरे°. Whitney: °पूर्वे°. F, M: °त्वाद्युत्तादानि°. E, F, I, O: °सर्वमेव विगृह्यते. Others: सर्वमेव समस्यते. C: no such verse. Translation: Where both the first and the second [upasargas] are naturally accented (udātta), in such cases, after isolating the

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 488 initial accented items [as independent words in the Padapāṭha], all the items are separated. Note: On this verse, Whitney (1862: 263) remarks: “Verse 11 has no example, and, although easily enough translated, its meaning is to me obscure.” To begin to make sense of this verse, we need to properly interpret the term ādyudātta. On the one hand, the term ādyudātta understood as ‘an item with its initial syllable with the udātta accent,’ distinguishes between accented and unaccented preverbs, and then distinguishes between those which are accented on the first syllable, and the ones which are accented on the last syllable. Such a distinction is possible only with polysyllabic upasargas. CA (4.1.19-21) below tell us that all the twenty upasargas are naturally accented. Out of the eleven polysyllabic upasargas, abhí is the only one which is accented on the final syllable. All the others are accented on the first syllable. If the verse above, as translated here, is to be meaningful, it refers to a difference of behavior between abhí and the rest of the upasargas. I have not been able to detect any clear behavioral difference. Therefore, I have chosen to interpret the term ādyudāttāni in the verse to refer to ‘initial accented items.’ If this meaning is accepted, then we can find examples to illustrate this verse. As far as I can see, all the 57 examples listed under APR (13c, pp. 12-14) would fall into this category. Here, typically, an unaccented verb is preceded by two accented upasargas, and the Padapāṭha isolates all of these as separate words. For example: úpa prā́gāt (AV 1.28.1), Padapāṭha : úpa / prá / agāt /. I should note here that over half the mss. read सर्वमेव समस्यते instead of सर्वमेव विगृह्यते. I have chosen the latter reading, and I admit, along with Whitney, that I cannot make any sense of the former. ४.१.१४.नाख्यातानि समस्यन्ते न चाख्यातं च नाम च । नाम नाम्नोपसर्गैस्तु संबद्धार्थं समस्यते ॥ Whitney (p. 261) quotes this as part of the commentary. E, F, I, O: नामाख्यातानि समस्यंते°. A, B, D, P: °पसर्ग्रै°. C: no such verse. P: नाख्यानि सम- स्यंते°. O: °नाम्नोपसर्गेस्तु°. H: संवधार्थं. Others: संबंधार्थं. Translation: Verbs are not compounded [with each other], nor is a verb and a noun compound [with each other]. How-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका489 ever, a semantically related noun is compounded with a noun or with a pre-verb (upasarga). Note: The reading sambandhārtham, as supported by most manuscripts, and by Whitney (1862: 262), would literally mean: ‘for the sake of relationship.’ However, taking a hint from the reading संवधार्थं in H, I have chosen to amend the text to संबद्धार्थं. The word sambaddhārtha as an equivalent to samartha is found in the MB on P.2.1.1 (Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., p. 365): सम्बद्धार्थः समर्थः. Also relevant in the context is the fact that the APR (3, p. 3) is identical with P.2.1.1 (समर्थः पदविधिः), and that the APR often brings up the notion that no compounding takes places between items which are asamartha, cf. APR (13b, p. 12). I suspect that the present verse is making a similar statement. The statement सम्बद्धार्थं समस्यते of this verse is comparable to APR (13b, p. 12): उपसर्गपूर्वमाख्यातं यत्रोभाभ्यां समस्यते । सामर्थ्यमुभयोस्तत्रासामर्थ्येषु विग्रहः ॥. ४.१.१५.न युष्मदस्मदादेशा अनुदात्ताः पदात्परे । नामोपसर्गगतिभिः समस्यन्ते कदाचन ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B: °अनु- दात्तान्पदा°. I, M, P: °अनुदात्ताः पदा°. Others: °अनुदात्तात्पदा°. C: no such verse. P: °नाम्नोपसर्गगतिभिः … कदाचनः°. Translation: The unaccented forms of yuṣmad and asmad which occur after [other words, i.e. are enclitic,] are never com- pounded with nouns, preverbs and prepositional items. Note: Examples for this verse are found in the first half of the next verse. ४.१.१६.मामनुप्रतेप्रवामित्येवमादीन्युदाहरेत् । एतदश्चानुदात्तानि इदमश्च तथैव च ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. Whitney: °मि- त्येवमा°, °एतदर्श्चोनुदात्तानि°. A, B, D: °दींन्यु°. E, F, I, O: मामनुप्रते पुत्रमित्येव°. Others: मामनुप्रतेप्रवामी°. E, F, I, O: एतदश्चानुदात्तानीदमश्च°. A, B, D, J, M: °पदमस्य तथैव च. Others: एतदस्यानुदात्तानि इदमस्य. C: no such verse.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 490 Translation: [To illustrate the rule in the previous verse], one should offer examples such as: mā́m ánu prá te (AV 3.18.6) and prá vām (AV 7.73.5). [The second half of this verse goes with the next verse, and is translated below]. Note: The Padapāṭha isolates prá from te and vām in these examples to indicate that they are separate words, and not members of compounds. ४.१.१७.नामोपसर्गगतिभिः समस्यन्ते कदाचन । बृहन्नेषां य एनां वनिमायन्ति पर्येनान् पर्यस्येति निदर्शनम् ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. C: no such rule. P: एनं for एनां. Translation: [Beginning with the second half of the previous verse]: The unaccented forms of etad, as well as those of idam, are never compounded with nouns, pre-verbs, and prepositional items. The examples are: br̥hánn eṣām (AV 4.16.1), yá enāṃ vaním āyánti (AV 12.4.11), páry enān (AV 9.2.5), and páry asya (AV 15.12.7). Note: It is clear that this must be a prohibitory rule. However, the text of the verses does not contain an explicit na. We need to continue the force of na in the previous rule into this rule, perhaps indicated by ca “also.” The Padapāṭha clearly separates the forms eṣām, enām, enān, and asya from the neighboring words to indicate that there is no compounding. ४.१.१८.अनुदात्तो गतिः सर्वैः समस्तः स्वरितादिभिः । संस्राव्येण दुरर्मण्य आचार्येति निदर्शनम् ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. E, F, I, O: reads CA 4.1.11 in this place, and read this verse in another location. E, F, H, I, M: अनुदात्तोनुगतिः सर्वैः समस्तस्वरितादिभिः°. E, F, I: °सँस्राव्येण निर्दुरर्मण्य°. E, F, H, I, O: °आचार्येति°. Others: आचार्य इति. C: no such verse. O: °संस्राव्येण निदुर्मण्य°. P: °संस्राव्ये दुर्मण्य°. Translation: An unaccented prepositional item is com- pounded with all kinds of words which have circumflex and

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका491 other accents, for example: saṃsrāvyèṇa (AV 1.15.1), durar- maṇyàḥ (AV 16.2.1), and ācāryàḥ (AV 11.5.3). Note: Given the fact that the reading svaritādibhiḥ is supported by all mss., it can either mean ‘svarita etc.’ or ‘those which begin with a svarita sylla- ble.’ Since the second meaning does not seem to be even remotely applicable, we must accept the first meaning. Whitney (1862: 263) takes this to mean ‘however accented,’ and then says that the verse “illustrates only their compo- sition with a circumflexed word.” All the three illustrations demonstrate the same type, i.e. compounding of an unaccented prepositional item with the fol- lowing word with a svarita accent. How about the compounding of an unac- cented prepositional item with words with udātta or anudātta accents? If our understanding of the verse is correct, this should be possible. We can find a large number of instances where an unaccented preposi- tional item is compounded with the following word with an udātta syllable, e.g. sumatím (AV 4.25.6). However, it is not easy to find an unaccented preposi- tional item compounded with an unaccented (sarvānudātta) word. The only cases I can locate in the text of the AV are those where a previous compound becomes completely unaccented through further embedding, e.g. r̥táprajātā (AV 1.11.1), where the segment prajātā becomes completely unaccented because of its further compounding with r̥tá. Otherwise, the word would be accented as prájātā (AV 1.34.1). The AV mss. read durarmaṇya (AV 15.2.1). However, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 795) remarks: “The translation implies the change of durar- maṇyàs to duradmanyàs, as proposed by the Pet. Lexx. (add TB. iii.3.99 as a reference for duradmanī́). The reading of the mss. is, however, assured by its quotation in the Prāt., and three times in the Kāuś.” ४.१.१९.प्रपराणिसमादुर्णिरवाधिपरिवीति च । अत्यपिसूदपाभीत्युपानुप्रति विंशतिः ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, H: °सामा°. E, F, I: °समानिर्दु°. O: °समासाभिर्दुरवाधि°. Whitney, H: °परिवीनि°. A, B, D, J, M: °अव्यपि सूदयाभी°. A, B, D: °सूदयाभीत्पुनायानु°. C: no such verse. O: °सूदपाभीत्युपानु°. P: °भीत्युपादानुप्रति°. Translation: Prá, párā, ní, sám, ā́, dúr, nír, áva, ádhi, pári, ví, áti, ápi, sú, úd, ápa, abhí, úpa, ánu, and práti are the twenty [upasargas].

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 492 Note: For the second half of the verse, the meter requires us to read: अत्यपिसूदपाभीति उपानुप्रति विंशतिः. ४.१.२०.एकाक्षरा उदात्ता आद्युदात्तास्तथापरे । अभीत्यन्त उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे गतिस्तथा ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. I: एकाक्षरा उदा- त्तास्त आद्यु°. K: अभीत्यन्ता. Other mss. and Whitney: °अभीत्यन्त उप°. A, B, D: °सर्गा क्रिया°. C: no such verse. O: एकाक्षरमुदात्ता°. Translation: Of these, the monosyllabic ones have the high- pitch accent. Others have their first syllable with the high-pitch accent, [except for] abhí [which has its] final [syllable with the high-pitch accent]. In conjunction with verbs, these items are called upasarga, as well as gati. Note: The lone reading in I, i.e. एकाक्षरा उदात्तास्त आद्यु° looks like an effort to regularize a line which is otherwise metrically deficient, and this indi- cates that the metrically deficient reading, supported by most manuscripts, is the earlier reading. The expression abhītyanta(ḥ) must be interpreted to mean abhītyanto- dāttaḥ. The final part of the verse उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे गतिस्तथा calls to mind P.1.4.59 (उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे) and P.1.4.60 (गतिश्च). ४.१.२१.आद्युदात्ता दशैतेषामुच्चा एकाक्षरा नव । विंशतेरुपसर्गाणामन्तोदात्तस्त्वभीत्ययम् ॥ Whitney (p. 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. A, B, D, M: °सर्ग्रा°. C: no such verse. O: °दशैतेषाउच्चा°. Translation: Of these twenty upasargas, ten [polysyllabic ones] have their initial syllable high-pitched, nine monosyllabic ones are high-pitched, and abhí has its final syllable high- pitched. Note: This verse is quoted in the Prātiśākhyapradīpaśikṣā (Śikṣāsaṃgraha, p. 267). It is prefaced with tathā coktam, and the first and the second lines are reversed. In the same form, this verse occurs in the RPR (12.22-24). Uvaṭa’s comment on this verse runs as: प्र, आ, निः, दुः, वि, सम्, नि, सु, उत्,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका493 इत्येतेषामुपसर्गाणां नवसंख्या एकाक्षराः उच्चाः उदात्ताः इत्यर्थः । एतेषामुपसर्गाणां दशाद्यु- दात्ता वेदितव्याः । परा, अनु, उप, अप, परि, प्रति, अति, अधि, अव, अपि इत्येते। एतेषामेवोपसर्गाणां मध्ये अभि इत्ययमन्तोदात्तो वेदितव्यः । ४.१.२२.अच्छारमस्तंहस्तलांगूलंतिरःपुरःपुनर्णवश्येतीवातीफलीहिंस्रु- ग्वषडुलुलाककजास्वाहास्वधाश्रत्स्वरललेत्युपसर्गवृत्तीनि यथाम्नात- स्वराणि । Whitney (p, 262) quotes this as part of the commentary. All mss: °हस्तोलांगूलं°. Whitney: °हस्तलांगूलं°, °पुनर्णमः°, °क्षितीवाती°, °वषट्प्रादुरुलाककजा°, °यथास्तातस्वराणि°. All mss: °पुनर्णवः°. B, D: °अछादमस्तं°. E, F, I, O: °श्येतीवाती°. H: °क्षितीवाती°. Others: °सिनीवाली°. E, F: °वषुडुला°. E, F, H, I: °श्रत्स्वरल°. O: °श्रत्स्वररला इत्यु°. Other: °सृक्स्वर°. A, B, D: °पसर्ग्र° for °पसर्ग°. E, F, I, O: °यथा-म्नातः स्वराणि°. Others: यथाम्नातस्वरितानि. C: no such rule. P: °तिरः पुनः पुनर्णवः … सिनीवाती … वषडुडुला … स्तरललेत्यपसर्ग्र°. H: °वषड्गुदुरुला°. This is probably the most corrupt passage in this entire text. Translation: The following items, [though not listed as upa- sargas], behave like upasargas, and their accents are as recited: áccha, áram, ástam, hásta, lāṅgūlam, tiráḥ, puráḥ, púnaḥ, nava, śyetī́, vātī́, phalī, híṃ, srúk, váṣaṭ, ululā , kakajā́, svā́hā, svadhā́, śrat, svàr, alalā. Note: Whitney (1862) took great pains to make sense of this passage, for which he had only one manuscript. We shall begin by noting his comments (1862: 263-4): “Finally, the last verse (or prose passage) attempts to give a list of those words which are treated as if they were prepositions, although prop- erly belonging to what it includes and what it omits. A part of the forms which it contains are in frequent use, and familiarly known as bearing marked analo- gies with the prepositions proper. Such are achā, tiraḥ, puraḥ, punaḥ, hiṅ, prāduḥ, and śrat. Others, as aram and astam, are more remotely connected with the same class. Vaṣaṭ, svāhā, and vātī are in the Atharvan compounded only with kāra and kr̥ta, and hardly in such a manner as should require their inclusion in the list. Svadhā and sruk form no other compounds than svadhā- kāra and srukkāra (ix.6.22); phalī forms phalīkaraṇa (xi.3.6); kakajā forms kakajākr̥ta (xi.10.25). Namas enters into namaskāra, namaskr̥ta, and namas- kr̥tya (vii.102.1), which last affords actually good ground for special treatment, as does hastagr̥hya (e.g. v.14.4), on account of which hasta is ranked with the

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 494 others. For lāṅgūla, kṣitī, and ulā, I can find nothing at all in the Atharvan : there is room in the case of the two last, and especially of the third, to suspect corrupted readings. What may be hidden in svaralalā, I have not been able to discover, nor how the last word in the extract, which apparently has to do with the accent of the words treated of, is to be amended into intelligibility.” With the new set of manuscripts at our disposal, and with further thought on the listed items, I think it is now possible to advance beyond Whitney’s difficulties. We shall look at the listed items individually:

Áccha. For example: ácchā vada (AV 3.20.2). Compare P.1.4.69 (अच्छ गत्यर्थवदेषु), which treats áccha as a gati.
Áram (= álam). For example: áraṅkr̥tam (AV 12.1.22). Compare P.1.4.64 (भूषणेऽलम्), which treats álam as a gati.
Ástam. For example: astameṣyaté (AV 17.1.23). Compare P.1.4.68 (अस्तं च), which treats ástam as a gati.
Hásta. For example: hastagŕ̥hya (AV 5.14.4). Compare P.1.4.77 (नित्यं हस्ते पाणावुपयमने), which treats haste as a gati. The mss. reading hasto is probably a corruption of haste, as it is found in P.1.4.77.
Lāṅgūlam. The word lāṅgūla is attested in the Paippalāda AV (9.8.1) in the expression lāṅgūla-gr̥hya, which is directly comparable with hasta-gŕ̥hya (AV 5.14.4). Such an occurrence accounts for its being listed as an upasarga-vr̥tti item. In my view, this is the best explanation. However, I would like to mention two further possibilities. A possible reading is uluṅgulam. All manuscripts have the reading hastolāṅgūlaṃ, which Whitney amended to hastalāṅgūlam. This did not ac- count for the o in hasto. My guess is that hastoluṅgulaṃ could be analyzed as hasta+uluṅgulaṃ. Here, the word uluṅgulam is in all probability a portion of the name of the Apsaras mentioned in Paippalāda AV (15.19.1-12: इदमुलुङ्- गुलुकाभ्योऽप्सराभ्योऽकरं नमः). With the final agentive affix -uka, the formation uluṅgulukā looks like a derivation from a denominative verb uluṅgulati, from the sound-imitation uluṅgula-. Such sound-imitations, especially in com- bination with verbs like kr̥ are called gati, cf. ulalā and alalā below. The word uluṅgulukā has been provided with a somewhat unclear folk-etymology in Paippalāda AV (15.18.6: उलमालस्य यो गुलस्तदगश्छन्त्यासुरैः). I would also like to mention one more possibility. A reading such as hastolūgaluṃ may contain three words: hasta, ulū, and galuṃ. Here, the word ulū could be the first member of the word ulū́khala (AV 9.6.15) which is left unanalyzed by the Padapāṭha. The next item galuṃ may be the first portion of the expression galuntáḥ (AV 6.83.3). This expression is not split by the

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका495 Padapāṭha. However, Sāyaṇa explains this expression as: गडून् तस्यति इति गडुन्तः । तसु उपक्षये । अस्मात् औणादिकः क्विप्. Thus, if the word is traditionally derived from galu+tas, the ṃ could be explained on the analogy of forms like aruntuda, cf. P.6.3.67 (अरुर्द्विषदजन्तस्य मुम्). It is possible that Śākaṭāyana listed the form galuṃ as an upasargavr̥tti item. 6. Tiráḥ. For example: tiráskaraḥ (AV 4.20.7). Compare P.1.4.71 (तिरोऽन्तर्द्धौ), which treats tiráḥ as a gati. 7. Puráḥ. For example: puraḥsaraú (AV 15.2.1-4). Compare P.1.4.67 (पुरोऽव्ययम्), which treats puráḥ as a gati. 8. Púnar. For example: punardā́ya (AV 5.17.11). On P.1.4.60 (गतिश्च), Kātyāyana’s Vārttika (पुनश्चनसौ छन्दसि) adds púnar as a gati. 9. Náva. There is a strong possibility that náva, in the sense of ‘newly, recently,’ may have been treated as a gati in an instance like navagát (AV 3.10.4), which is split by the Padapāṭha as nava-gát. Also see: Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik, Vol. II., Pt. I., Nachträge zu Band II1, von Albert Debrunner, p. 21: “nava- im Sinn von *návam ‘neulich’ (vgl. gr. #∃%&∍∃#() usw. zu #∃%#) z.B. v. nava-sū́- ‘eine Kuh, die kÜrzlich gekalbt hat’ Schwyzer Mél. Boisacq 2, 236.” All the manuscripts read punarṇavaḥ. It is easy to see how the combination in the list of punar+nava may have been identified by the copyists with the AV word punarṇavaḥ (AV 8.1.20). Against his manuscript, and now against all manuscripts, Whitney amended the text to read punarṇamaḥ. Námas is attested in AV. For example: namaskāréṇa (AV 4.39.9). The word namaḥ is included in the sākṣātprabhr̥tīni list of items treat as gati in combination with the root kr̥, cf. P.1.4.74 (साक्षात्प्रभृतीनि च), and the KV on this rule. However, given the above explana- tion in favor of náva, we need not go for Whitney’s emendation. 10. Śyetī́. This reading is supported by mss. E, F, I, and O, and probably is the source of the reading kṣitī in H. The item syetī as a cvi-form appears in combination with the verb kr̥ in the Taittirīya-Saṃhitā (5.5.8: śyaiténa śyetī́ akuruta … śyaiténa śyetī́ kurute). This form, along with mithunī, is mentioned in TPR (x.18: न श्येती मिथुनी). While the AV does not have the usage of śyetī́+kr̥, the word śyaita is attested in AV (15.2.4). The similarity of the formations śyetī́+kr̥ with vātī+kr̥ below is inescapable. I would like to mention sani as another possibility, though not a very strong one. In the form saniṣyadā́ḥ (AV 19.2.1), the portion sani is actually part of reduplication of the root in the intensive form. However, several manu- scripts of the Padapāṭha place an avagraha between sani and syadā́ḥ, suggest- ing that somebody at sometime may have looked at sani as a first member of a compound-expression, cf. Whitney, Index Verborum to AV, p. 304, and the

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 496 VVRI edition, Part IV, Fasc. I., p. 1790. Whitney (AV Translation, Vol. II., p. 899) says: “Our saniṣyadā́s in c is an emendation, and called for !see Skt. Gram. § 1148. 4. k., near the end∀; all the mss., and SPP., accent saniṣyádās. … The pada-mss. make the absurd division sani°syádāḥ.” While Whitney’s view may be historically correct, there is no reason to reject out of hand the strong possibility that some traditions analyzed the word differently. This is especially so in view of the different accentuation for the word found in the manuscripts. The combination sani-vātī in the list was easily misunderstood and changed to sinīvālī by some copyists. 11. Vātī́. For example: vātī́kr̥tasya (AV 6.109.3). Such forms are in- cluded under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). 12. Phalī. For example: phalīkáraṇāḥ (AV 11.3.6). The item phalī- kr̥tya is listed by the KV under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). 13. Híṃ. For example: hiṅkāráḥ (AV 11.7.5). Compare the items hum, ghum etc. which are listed among nipātas under P.1.4.57 (चादयोऽसत्त्वे), cf. the KV on P.1.4.57. As imitations of sounds, these are covered as gatis under P.1.4.62 (अनुकरणं चानितिपरम्). 14. Srúk. For example: srukkāréṇa (AV 9.6.22). This expression ap- pears in the same verse which has the more familiar expression vaṣaṭkāréṇa, and the items listed next in our list is váṣaṭ. 15. Váṣaṭ. For example: vaṣaṭkāréṇa (AV 9.6.22). The item váṣaṭ is listed as a gati in the ūryādigaṇa in P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च), cf. the KV on P.1.4.61. 16. Ululā . This is my suggested emendation. The mss. readings vary: uḍulā, gudurulā, ulā. The form ululā is made likely by the fact that AV (3.19.6) has the expression ghóṣā ululáyaḥ. Sāyaṇa’s commentary has the reading ullulayáḥ, which he explains as अनुकरणशब्दोऽयम् । उल्लुलु इत्येवमात्मका घोषाः. If ululu or ullulu is a sound-imitation, then to combine it with a verb like kr̥ in the sense of making that sound, P.1.4.62 (अनुकरणं चानितिपरम्), the sound-imitation is given the designation gati. Also P.5.4.57 (अव्यक्तानुकरणाद् द्व्यजवरार्धादनितौ डाच्) prescribes the affix ḍāc to be added to a sound-imitation like ululu to turn it into ululā before it is compounded with a verb like karoti. In fact, the expressions ululākuru and ululākr̥taḥ are attested in Paippalāda AV (5.34.2, and 2.55.5). Thus, we can confidently have the form ululā eligible for inclusion in the present list. Compare the other included sound-imitation alalā. 17. Kakajā́. For instance: kakajā́kr̥tā (AV 11.10.25). This belongs to the same type of gatis listed under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). 18. Svā́hā. For example: svāhākārám (AV 15.14.8). The item svā́hā is listed as a gati under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका497 19. Svadhā́. For example: svadhākārám (AV 15.14.7). The item svadhā́ is listed as a gati under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). 20. Śrát. For example: śraddhéyam (AV 4.30.4). The item śrát is listed as a gati under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). 21. Svàr. For example: svargáḥ (AV 9.5.16) analyzed by the Padapāṭha as svaḥ-gáḥ. P.1.1.37 (स्वरादिनिपातमव्ययम्) includes svar among in- declinables. 22. Alalā. There is no example for alalā in AV. However, alalā is found compounded in the following usage: alalābhávantīḥ (RV 4.18.6) ‘mak- ing the sound alalā,’ cf. Sāyaṇa: अललेत्येवंरूपं शब्दं कुर्वत्यः.. Such compounding be covered by P.1.4.62 (अनुकरणं चानितिपरम्), giving the status of gati to the sound-imitation alalā. This solves the puzzle of svaralalā which Whitney was unable to solve. It also shows that this list is not restricted to items from the AV, but includes items from other textual traditions. Whitney further comments: “There are two words which we especially miss in this list of upasargavr̥ttīni, and can hardly believe to have been origi- nally absent from it: they are antaḥ and āviḥ : I cannot, however, find by emen- dation any place for them in the text as it stands.” It is difficult to say why these words are not included in the list. These are examples of gatis in the Pāṇinian tradition. The word antaḥ as a gati is covered by P.1.4.65 (अन्तर- परिग्रहे), and āvis as a gati is covered under P.1.4.61 (ऊर्यादिच्विडाचश्च). Perhaps another enumeration ascribed to Śākaṭāyana did include the particle antar. Referring to Śākaṭāyana’s view, the Br̥haddevatā (2.95) says: अच्छश्रदन्तरित्येतानाचार्यः शाकटायनः । उपसर्गान्क्रियायोगान्मेने ते तु त्रयोऽधिकाः ॥ Finally, I believe that this entire initial portion probably represents a very ancient incorporation into the text of the original CA. However, since all manuscripts of the CA, except C, contain them, I believe that the text of the CA, as it can be reconstructed on the basis of the manuscripts, must incorpo- rate these passages. Clearly, the archetype of all our manuscripts must have had this portion. However, it is most likely that they were incorporated into the text of the CA after the CAB. While the CAB itself probably did not know these verses as part of the text of the CA, and therefore did not comment on them, the copyists of the manuscripts of the CAB definitely knew them, and they did incorporate these uncommented verses in their manuscripts. Also see the note on the colophon for this Pāda for a serious disagreement on the num- ber of rules in this Pāda. A possible hint is provided by Bhārgava-Bhāskara for the importance of the views of Śākaṭāyana to the later followers of Śaunakīya AV, that, while

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 498 professing themselves to be followers of Śaunaka, they often disregarded Śaunaka’s precepts in preference to those of Śākaṭāyana, cf. Bhārgava- Bhāskara’s commentary on CA (1.1.10): अत्र वेदे तु प्रथमपद्यो गृह्यते शाकटायनानु- सरणात्. The presence of such a large extract supposedly from a work of Śāka- ṭāyana, or a work from his tradition, may be an indication of such influence on the CA tradition. Also see CA 4.1.52, and the CAB on that rule. ४.१.२३. उपसर्ग आख्यातेनोदात्तेन समस्यते । Whitney (4.1). A, B, C: °र्ग्र°. D: उपसर्ग आख्यातेनोदात्ते । न समस्यते. O: °आख्यातेन चोदात्तेन°. Translation: A pre-verb (upasarga) is compounded with an accented verb. Note: In the situation envisioned by this rule, the pre-verb (upasarga) is unaccented and the verb is accented. Whitney says: “This is the well-known usage of all the Vedic pada-texts, at least so far as they have been brought to general knowledge. With a true appreciation of the slightness of the bond which connects a verb with its prefix, the constructors of the disjoined text have ordinarily treated the two as independent words: unless, indeed, by laws of accentuation of the sentence, the usually enclitic verb retains its accent and becomes proclitic; and then the two are written together as a compound.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्ग आख्यातेनोदात्तेन सह सम- स्यते। ‘प॒रि॒यन्ति॑’ (अ.वे. १.१.१, पद * ‘प॒रि॒ऽयन्ति॑’)। ‘स॒मभ॑रः’ (अ.वे. १.९.३, पद * ‘स॒म्ऽअभ॑रः’)। ‘सं॒स्र- व॑न्ति’ (अ.वे. १.१५.३, पद * ‘स॒म्ऽस्रव॑न्ति)। उपसर्ग- वृत्तिभिश्च । ‘यम् । अ॒रा॒ते॒ । पु॒रः॒ऽध॒त्से’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.७. २)। ‘यम् । अ॒मी इति॑ । पु॒रः॒ऽद॒धि॒रे’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.८. ५)। उदात्तेनेति किमर्थम् । ‘या॒तु॒ऽधाना॑न् । वि । ला॒प॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १.७.२)। Note: This rule is comparable to part of APR (12a). However, the ex- amples listed under APR (12a) are not identical with the examples cited here by

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका499 the CAB. Since the positive examples of the rules do not form a closed gaṇa, one can guess that there was no standard list of such examples. The distinction between samāsa and non-samāsa manifests itself in the Padapāṭha, where an upasarga combined as a samāsa with the verb form is separated in the Padapāṭha by an Avagraha. On the other hand, an upasarga which is not combined as a samāsa with the verb is separated from that verb in the Padapāṭha as a separate word. The commentary makes an interesting observation. It refers to two classes of items, the upasargas and the upasargavr̥ttis ‘words which behave like upasargas, but are not upasargas.’ Items like puras have been categorized as upasargavr̥tti in CA (4.1.22). As discussed in the note on that rule, it is not clear whether the author of the CAB was familiar with the verses at the begin- ning of this Pāda. It is also likely that it was the CAB that cited the entire pas- sage in the beginning, and then, for some reason, it was incorporated into the text of the CA. ४.१.२४. अनेकोऽनुदात्तेनापि । Whitney (4.2). Translation: When there is more than one pre-verb [preceding the verb], they are [all] compounded even with an unaccented verb. Note: It may be noted that CA (4.1.5-6) formulate this rule in a somewhat different way, and it seems most likely that they were not part of the ‘original’ CA, but were extracted from a different grammatical tradition and added to the text of the CA at some point. As Whitney points out: “If more prepositions than one are compounded with an unaccented verb, only one of them, the one next the verb, is accented, the others becoming proclitic. In such a case, the constructors of the pada-text have very properly combined all with the verb, instead of simply putting the prepositions together, since it is not the relation of the former to the latter preposition that costs the former its accent, but rather their common relation to the verb : we have not a compound preposition, but a duplicate verbal com- pound. A later rule (rule 7 = CA 4.1.29, below) teaches us that in such a com- bination the first of the prepositions is separated by avagraha from the rest.” The rule seems to leave open the possibility, not discussed by Whitney, that a multiplicity of pre-verbs may be compounded with an accented verb as

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 500 well. However, all the examples offered here are examples of unaccented verbs. See the Notes on CA (4.1.5-6). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनेक उपसर्गः अनुदात्तेनापि आख्या- तेन सह समस्यते । ‘उ॒त्ऽअव॑स्यति’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.६.५४, VVRI edn.: ९.११.६)। ‘स॒म्ऽआचि॑नुष्व । अ॒नु॒ऽस॒म्प्रया॑हि’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.३६)। ‘उ॒प॒ऽस॒म्परा॑न(H: ण)यात्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.४.५०)। उपसर्गवृत्तिभिश्च । ‘अ॒च्छ॒ऽआव॑दामसि’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.३८.३, VVRI edn.: ७.३९.३)। ‘अ॒भि॒ऽ- हिङ्कृ॑णोत’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३.३७)। Note: On the citation from AV (18.4.50), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II. p. 884) points out: “Three of out pada-mss. (Bp.Kp.D., but D. not ac- cented) make the anomalous division upa°sám : parānayāt; the other (Op.) has upa°sampárānayāt, which is the regular and proper form: see Prāt. iv. 2 (= CA 4.1.24) and note, and iv.7 (= CA 4.1.29).” ४.१.२५. अनर्थककर्मप्रवचनीयान्ययुक्तैर्विग्रहोऽभिवितन्वादिषु । Whitney (4.3): अनर्थकर्म°. O: °युक्तैर्गृहोभिवि°. Translation: [However], meaningless prepositional items, prepositional items syntactically linked with nouns (karma- pravacanīya), and those which are related in some other way, are separated [ from the verb in the Padapāṭha as independent uncompounded words], as in examples such as: abhí / ví / tanu (AV 1.1.3). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनर्थकैश्च कर्मप्रवचनीयैश्च अन्ययुक्तैश्च विग्रहो भवति अभिवितन्वादिषु । ‘इ॒ह । ए॒व । अ॒भि। वि । त॒नु॒’ (पद, अ. वे. १.१.३)। ‘सम् । सम् । स्र॒व॒न्तु॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१५.१)। ‘सु । प्र । सा॒ध॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२४. ४)। ‘उप॑ । प्र । अ॒गा॒त्’ (पद, अ. वे. १.२८.१)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका501 Note: The CAB lists here the first four instances out of a total list of fifty-seven instances found in the APR (13). The instances are cited exactly in the same order. The CA rule is itself identical with, and perhaps is a quotation in, APR (13c). The notion that certain prepositional items are anarthaka in certain contexts is also seen in P.1.4.93 (अधिपरी अनर्थकौ). The KV on this rule says that the items adhi and pari are given the designation karmapravacanīya, when not bearing any meaning, in order to prevent the designations gati and upasarga : गत्युपसर्गसंज्ञाबाधनार्था कर्मप्रवचनीयसंज्ञा विधीयते. Our rule here, and the commentary on it, seem to differentiate between the categories anarthaka and karmapravacanīya. Neither the CAB nor the APR explain as to which exam- ples are offered to illustrate which type. However, a related discussion of some of these issues is found under APR (3, p. 4): ‘पषा त्वे॒तश्च्या॑वयतु॒ प्र वि॒द्वान्’ (१८.२.५४)। अत्र च प्र वि॒द्वान् विगृह्यते । समासोऽन्यत्र । किं कारणम्? प्रेत्यस्य च्यवतिना सामर्थ्यम् । पूषा त्वेतः प्रच्यावयतु विद्वान् इति । ‘कर्म॑न्कर्म॒न्नाभ॑गम्’ - कर्म॑न्ऽकर्मन् । आऽभ॑गम् (४.२३.३)। आभ॑गम् इति समस्यते । विग्रहोऽन्यत्र । किं प्रयोजनम् । कर्मणि कर्मण्या- भगम् । ‘अधि॑श्रितेऽग्निह॒ोत्रे’ - अधि॑ऽश्रिते । अ॒ग्नि॒ऽह॒ोत्रे (१५.१२.१)। अधिशब्दस्य श्रितशब्देन सह समासः । विग्रहोऽन्यत्र । कस्मात् ? कर्म- प्रवचनीयत्वात् । Whitney (1862: 186) says: “The term anyayukta probably means ‘be- longing to another verb,’ but such cases are quite rare in the text : an instance of the kind intended is perhaps níḥ stuvānásya pātaya (i.8.3), where the prepo- sition niḥ belongs to the verb pātaya, and not the intervening participle, to which it would otherwise be attached, with loss of its own accent. Pāṇini’s karmapravacanīya is comprehensive enough to include all the cases to which our rules apply.” A similar example of anyayukta is offered by the APR passage cited above, e.g. AV (18.2.54), where pra is not compounded with vidvān, since pra is semantically related to cyāvayatu, rather than to vidvān. To this extent, Whitney’s understanding seems to be correct. However, Whitney is not correct in suggesting that cases like these would be subsumed under Pāṇini’s notion of karmapravacanīya. As I have pointed out above, Pāṇini’s notion of karmapravacanīya, subsumes the in- stances of anarthaka, cf. P.1.4.93. However, there is no reason to believe that

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 502 instances of anyayukta would be covered under his notion of karmapravcanīya. The compounding of anyayukta items would be prevented by the general con- vention set by P.2.1.1 (समर्थः पदविधिः), which lays down the rule that processes like compounding take place only for the items which are semantically and syntactically related to each other. Interestingly, the APR (3), which is identi- cal with P.2.1.1, has the same import, and the APR specifically prohibits com- pounding because of the lack of sāmarthya ‘semantic/syntactic relationship,’ cf. APR (13b, p. 12): उपसर्गपूर्वमाख्यातं यत्रोभाभ्यां समस्यते । सामर्थ्यमुभयोस्तत्रासामर्थ्येषु विग्रहः ॥ Commenting on the present rule, Whitney exerts to bring together a large collection of instances for “this and the two following rules, since they evidently form a single class, and are only formally distinct from one another.” Now that we have access to Surya Kanta’s APR, we can be certain that these two gaṇas were treated as distinct gaṇas, and they are listed separately in that text. The examples offered by the CAB appear to be the first few citations of the long lists found in the APR. Further, the APR brings out some crucial dif- ferences which are not overtly mentioned by the CA, or the CAB. ४.१.२६. पूर्वेणाभिविपश्याम्यादिषु । Whitney (4.4). O: °पश्यांम्या°. Translation: In abhi vipaśyāmi etc., the first [prepositional item is separated as an independent word]. Note: Whitney says that, in these instances, “a preposition retaining its accent and independence before another preposition which is itself made proclitic and combined with a following accented verb.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वेण उपसर्गेण विग्रहो भवति अभि विपश्याम्यादिषु । ‘याव॑त् । ते॒ । अ॒भि । वि॒ऽपश्या॑मि’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१.३३)। ‘मन॑सा । अ॒भि । स॒म्ऽवि॒दुः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२१.५)। ‘याव॑त् । सा । अ॒भि । वि॒ऽजङ्ग॑हे’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१९.४)। ‘यः । विश्वा॑। अ॒भि । वि॒ऽपश्य॑ति’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३४.४)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका503 Note: The CAB lists here the first four instances out of a total of seven listed in the APR (12c). The passages occur exactly in the same order as found in the APR. The APR rule (12c) says: “When an accented verb is pre- ceded by two prepositions, separated (from the second preposition+verb) are such items as are used without significance, or as karmapravacanīyas, or con- nected with something else.” While the CA rule simply makes a reference to a list, the APR (12c) provides a more detailed description, and a reasoning. It still leaves a logical possibility open that an accented verb could be com- pounded with two pre-verbs, which are not anarthaka, karmapravacanīya, or anyayukta. However, I have not found any such instances. ४.१.२७. योनावध्यैरयन्तादिषु च । Whitney (4.5). Translation: [The preverb is separated from the verb as an independent word in the Padapāṭha] in examples such as yónāv ádhy aírayanta (AV 2.1.5). Note: Whitney says: “This rule applies to such cases … as show an accented and independent preposition immediately before an accented verb.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - योनावध्यैरयन्तादिषु च उपसर्गेण विग्रहो भवति । ‘स॒मा॒ने । योनौ॑ । अधि॑ । ऐर॑यन्त’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१.५)। ‘अधि॑ । त॒स्थुः’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.९.२, VVRI edn.: ९.१४.२)। ‘ये । अस॑तः । परि॑ । ज॒ज्ञि॒रे’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.७.२५)। ‘स॒मु॒द्रात् । अधि॑। ज॒ज्ञि॒षे’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१०.२)। ‘परि॑ । भूम॑ । जाय॑से’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.३)। Note: As Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 56) points out the gaṇa referred to in this CA rule occurs fully in APR (12b), and the CAB lists all the examples exactly in the same order. Referring to the last example cited by the CAB, Whitney says: “The citation of the last passage seems to imply that the commentator regarded bhūma as a verbal form, from the root bhū; but he can hardly, except in the forgetfulness of a moment, have been guilty of so gross a blunder.” Also see:

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 504 Surya Kanta (APR, Notes, p. 6). While one must agree with Whitney and Surya Kanta that bhūma is not a verb, it is now clear that the CAB was not alone in including this example in this list, but the APR (p. 11) also includes it in the same list, and the shared example shows a close connection between these two texts, to the point of having shared conceptual errors. ४.१.२८. आशीर्बभूवेति प्लुतस्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात् । Whitney (4.6): °प्लुतस्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात्°. C, E, F, I, O, P(corr): °प्लुतः स्वर- स्यासिद्धत्वात्. H, M: °प्लुतः स्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात्. Others: °प्लुतस्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात्. Translation: [There is separation of the pre-verb from the verbs] āśī́3ḥ (AV 11.3.26) and babhūvā̃́3, because the pro- longed [i.e. pluta, vowel of the verbs] is [already] effected (siddha). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आशीर्बभूवेति प्लुतः स्वरस्य सिद्ध- त्वात् उपसर्गेण विग्रहो भवति । ‘परा॑ञ्चम् । ओ॒द॒नम् । प्र। आ॒शी[३]ः’ (पद, ११.३.२६)। ‘आ । ब॒भू॒वाँ३’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.२.२८)। Note: On this rule, Whitney says: “That is to say, if I do not misap- prehend the meaning of the rule, owing to the recognition of the final syllable of each word as a protracted one. To what end the precept is given, unless the words referred to (x.2.28 and xi.3.26, 27) have an irregular accent on the pro- tracted syllable, I do not see. If accented, they would have a right, by the first rule of this chapter (= CA 4.1.23), to combination with the preceding preposi- tion; but, the present rule virtually says, they are seen to lose this right upon a recognition of the fact that the accented vowel is protracted, and that its accent is therefore of an anomalous character. It has been already noticed (under i. 105 = CA 1.4.14) that a part of our manuscripts accent babhūvā̃́3 in the latter of the two passages referred to : not one gives an accent to āśī3ḥ, in either case of its occurrence.” The VVRI edition goes with the majority of the manuscripts and gives the accent of babhūvā̃́3 as antodātta, while it notes the unaccented reading given by the Whitney-Roth edition in the footnote. Also in prá āśī́3ḥ (AV 11.3.26, 27), the VVRI edition gives the accented reading. In view of the fact that P.8. 2.97 (विचार्यमाणानाम्) which sanctions the pluta vowel also ensures the udātta

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका505 accent for the pluta vowel, this reading seems appropriate. In contrast with this, the non-pluta reading for prá āśīḥ in AV (11.3.28) is unaccented, and, as the Padapāṭha shows, the accented preverb prá is compounded with the unaccented āśīḥ in AV (11.3.28). On the other hand, in AV (11.3.26, 27), the accented preverb prá is not compounded with the accented pluta form āśī́3ḥ. It is in the process of becoming pluta that the vowel also becomes ac- cented. Pāṇini’s rules for pluta and its accent are in the section beginning with P.8.2.82 (वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्तः), and the convention set by P.8.2.1 (पूर्वत्रासिद्धम्) says that, for rules preceding P.8.2.1, the results of rules coming afterwards are treated as if not effected (asiddha), and that even among the rules which follow P.8.2.1, any given rule does not recognize the following rules and their results. The words siddha and asiddha are crucial in this context, and perhaps the CA is alluding to some such distinction. The CA seems to be saying that, in the context of compounding with the pre-verb, the accent of the pluta vowel is to be treated as a fully valid result. In both the examples cited under this rule, the pre-verbs are accented, as well as the verbs, and hence there is no compounding. The Padapāṭha generally does not have a compound-expression with two udātta syllables in it. This is probably what goes against the compounding in the present case, and this is also probably why the rule uses प्लुतस्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात् as a reason. ४.१.२९. पूर्वेणावग्रहः । Whitney (4.7). B, D, J, M: पूर्वेणाविग्रहः. I: 48. The numbering in I indi- cates that the earlier verses were considered to be part of the text of the CA. Perhaps, the verses were broken down into multiple rules in some text-tradi- tions. Translation: [In the Padapāṭha], there is separation with an avagraha [i.e. pause marking the separation of a member of a compound-expression, as contrasted with virāma or a pause marking the separation of independent words,] of the first [of the many preverbs from the rest, which are left joined to the verb]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वेण उपसर्गेण अवग्रहो भवति । ‘उ॒प॒ऽअवै॑ति’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.६.५३, VVRI edn.: ९.११.५)। ‘उ॒त्ऽअव॑स्यति’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.६.५४, VVRI edn.: ९.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 506 ११.६)। ‘स॒म्ऽआचि॑नुष्व । अ॒नु॒ऽसं॒प्रया॑हि’ (पद, अ.वे. ११. १.३६)। ‘उ॒प॒ऽसं॒परा॑नयात्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.४.५०)। Note: Whitney observes: “The avagraha, or pause of separation between the two parts of a compound word, is defined by two of the Prāti- śākhyas (as has been already remarked, in the note following iii. 74 = CA 3.3.25) as having the length of a mora. From here to the end of section II (rule 72 = CA 4.2.26), the treatise is occupied with rules for its employment or omission. And, in the first place, with however many propositions a verbal form may be compounded, it is always the first of them that is separated from the rest of the compound by avagraha.” Rule CA (3.3.35: ऋगर्धर्चपदान्तावग्रहविवृ- त्तिषु मात्राकालः कालः), also says that the avagraha is of one mora duration, but so is the pause between words (padānta). See Notes on CA (3.3.19) and CA (3.3.35). Another general principle is that irrespective of the number of members a compound-expression may have, there is only one avagraha. ४.१.३०. यातुमावत् । Whitney (4.8). I: 49. P combines this with the following rule. Translation: In the expression yātumāvat, [the former mem- ber, i.e. yātu, is separated from the rest of the members with an avagraha]. Note: Whitney says: “It comes in rather awkwardly here, as only prepositions have been contemplated, thus far in the chapter, as former con- stituents of compounds.” However, it is clear that, as an exceptional item, it had to be taken care of somewhere. The assumption seems to be that the word has three members, i.e. yātu-mā-vat. However, in the Padapāṭha, only the first item is separated with an avagraha. The CAB also cites another view that -māvat is a single affix having the same meaning as -mat. The word yātumāvat appears several times in the RV (1.36.20; 7.1.5; 7.104.23; and 8.49.20), where the Padapāṭha follows the same division as pre- scribed by our rule. However, perhaps through oversight, Surya Kanta (1981: 546) cites this expression divided as yātumā́+vat.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका507 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यातुमावदिति च पूर्वेणावग्रहो भवति। ‘या॒तु॒ऽमाव॑त्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.४.२३)। मत्वर्थे वायं माव- च्छब्दो मतु(H: नु)पो मकारस्य वकारः । आकारागम(H: °त्य)ः (?)। ४.१.३१. समासे च । Whitney (4.9). I: 50. Translation: Separation [of the members] by avagraha [takes place in the Padapāṭha] also for a compound. Note: Whitney says: “The ca in the rule evidently continues the impli- cation simply of avagraha from rule 7 (= CA 4.1.29), and the connection of the text casts upon yātumāvat the suspicion of being an interpolation.” While one feels like agreeing with Whitney, one must note that all manuscripts contain the rule yātumāvat, and, therefore, if this is an interpolation, it must be a very an- cient interpolation, certainly predating the composition of the CAB. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समासे च अवग्रहो भवति । ‘उप॑ऽ- हूतः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१.४)। ‘भूरि॑ऽधायसम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२.१)। ‘भूरि॑ऽवर्पसम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२.१)। ‘भूरि॑ऽ- धनाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.६०.४, VVRI edn.: ७.६२.४)। ४.१.३२. उपजाते परेण । Whitney (4.10). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: When [a pre-existing compound is expanded with a] newly added [member], the latter [i.e. newly added member, is separated with an avagraha, and not the members of the old compound].

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 508 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपजाते परेण पर्वणा अवग्रहो भवति। ‘प्र॒जाऽप॑तिः’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३४.४)। प्रजानां पतिः । ‘प्र॒जा-प॑तिऽसृष्टः’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.६.१९)। Note: As Whitney explains: “The word prajā is itself divisible as a compound - thus, pra-jā (e.g. vii.35.3); upon farther adding pati, the former division is given up in favor of that between the old compound and its added member, and we have prajā-pati (e.g. ii.34.4); and a similar addition and re- moval of the pause of separation gives us prajāpati-sr̥ṣṭaḥ : while we might have, did the words occur, the yet farther change prajāpatisr̥ṣṭaḥ-iva, or prajāpatisr̥ṣṭi-bhiḥ, and prajāpatisr̥ṣṭibhiḥ-iva. In no compound is the separation by avagraha made at more than one point, and it is always the member last ap- pended which is entitled to separation.” This rule presents a very important observation as regards the division of compounds. It implicitly recognizes that certain compounds are already in use and are fully entrenched in the language, and then other members are added to them. Thus, one should not assume that a compound with three members, e.g. ABC, could be split in all sorts of possible ways. One must take into account which members are entrenched in the usage. Otherwise, one could possibly argue that pra has been added to a prior compound jāpati. This is unacceptable, because no expression like jāpati is in use. On the other hand, the expression prajā is in use. Thus, the practice of separating compounds by avagraha provides us significant insight into how the ancient grammarians looked at the relation of the linguistic usage and the grammatical theory. Com- pare P.2.1.4 (सह सुपा), which, with the continuation of sup from P.2.1.2, lays down the general principle that, at a time, only one noun is compounded with another noun. Thus, generally, a multi-member compound must be succes- sively built through incorporation of prior compounds. This general discus- sion is also taken up by the Vārttikas (25 ff.) on P.2.1.1, MB (Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., pp. 372-3. For a detailed discussion, see: S.J. Joshi (1968: 168-208). It may be noted that the grammarians did not bother themselves with the ques- tion of avagraha, and that dimension was left for the Prātiśākhyas. ४.१.३३. सुप्राव्या च । Whitney (4.11). A, B, D, H, M: सुप्राच्या च.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका509 Translation: Also in the expression suprāvyā (AV 4.30.6), [the last member is separated with an avagraha]. Note: As Whitney says: “In the word specified the last member is separated from the rest of the compound, and not the first, as would be more in accordance with the general analogies of the system of separation.” Normally, with a verbal noun with two preverbs, the first preverb is separated with an avagraha, cf. CA 4.1.7 and the Note on this rule. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सुप्राव्येति च परेण पर्वणा अवग्रहो भवति । ‘सु॒प्र॒ऽअ॒व्या॑ । यज॑मानाय’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३०.६)। ‘अवतेः [सु]प्रपूर्वस्य टाशब्दः स्वरितः परः । सुप्रावीति तृतीयायाः क्षैप्रः छन्दसि स्वर्यते ॥’ (source?) Note: For the expression ṭāśabdaḥ in the verse, Whitney proposes the emendation yaśabdaḥ. However, the expression ṭā here refers to the instru- mental singular affix in the Pāṇinian tradition, cf. Pāṇini 4.1.2. Thus, this tra- dition looks at the word suprāvyā as a feminine instrumental singular from the base suprāvī. Whitney mistakenly interprets the verse as suggesting a deriva- tion with the desiderative suffix yā, but then says: “Such an explanation, of course, would be futile, being sufficiently disproved by the accent alone.” As is clear, the verse does not propose such an interpretation in the first place. Sāyaṇa offers the reading suprāvye, perhaps under the influence of RV (10.125.2). The same reading is recorded by some AV manuscripts as noted in the VVRI edition. This perhaps shows the increasing influence from the RV tradition upon that of the AV in the post-CA period. For further dis- cussion of the RV and the AV readings, see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 201). Also note that the RV Padapāṭha separates members of this word in the same way as taught by this rule, and it may be that the exceptional character of this division is influenced by the RV tradition. The word suprāvī appears several times in the RV (1.34.4, 1.60.1, 1.83.1, 2.13.9, and 4.26.5), and in each case the word is split as supra-avī in the Padapāṭha. The word duṣprāvī also appears in RV (4.25.6) and it is split in an analogous way in the Padapāṭha. The word prāvī also appears in the RV (4.9.2), where the Padapāṭha splits its as pra-avī.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 510 The exceptional division of the word in the Padapāṭha may imply that, somehow, the words su and dus were not deemed by the author of the Padapāṭha as modifying the whole compound prāvī, but just the portion pra in it. This is analogous to the use of the adverb ‘very’ in English in a phrase like a very good person. Here, very goes with good, rather than with person. However, the presence of the compound prāvī, and the absence of just supra or duṣpra made it seem like, the normal avagraha may have been like su-prāvī or duḥ-prāvī. Since this was not the case, a separate rule to note the exception had to be given. ४.१.३४. अनिङ्गेन पूर्वेण । Whitney (4.12). I: °निंग्ये°. O: °निंग्येण°. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: When [the new compounding is with an indi- visible item], the old [member is separated with an avagraha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अनिङ्गेनोपजाते । अनिङ्गेन विशेष- लक्षणेन अविकृषितेन द्वयोः संशये जाते पूर्वेण अवग्रहो भवति । ‘सु॒ऽक्षे॒त्रि॒या । सु॒ऽगा॒तु॒या’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३३.२)। ‘स॒हऽसू॑क्तवाकः’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९७.६, VVRI edn.: ७. १०२.६)। ‘सऽअ॑न्तर्देशाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३७)। ‘सु॒ऽ- प्र॒जाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.११.३)। ‘द्वे यत्रावग्रहस्थाने पूर्वेणेति परेण वा । पूर्वेणावग्रहस्त(H: सू)त्र … सुक्षेत्रिया सान्तर्देशाः सुप्रजाश्च निदर्शनम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Here, the assumption seems to be that the original compound- ing in the form sukṣetriyā is with su+kṣetri, to which the new member yā is added. However, this new member yā being inseparable, the separation with an avagraha is carried out with the old member su. This is the same logic with the example sugātuyā. CA (4.1.52) and the CAB on it specify that the separa- tion with yā occurs only in five forms, and nowhere else. See the CAB on CA (4.1.52):

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका511 वसुअवस्वप्नसुम्न(H: प्त)साध्वित्येतैः सह याशब्दे परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘व॒सु॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३३.२)। ‘अ॒व॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३५.१)। ‘स्व॒प्न॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.७.८)। ‘सु॒म्न॒(H: प्त)ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.५५.१)। ‘सा॒धु॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.४.२१)। ‘पञ्चैवावग्रहानाह याशब्दे शाकटायनः । अन्तोदात्तः पदत्वं च विभक्तयर्थे भवेत्तु या ॥’ (source?) Thus, while we agree with Whitney that yā is not a universally aniṅgya affix, he fails to take due notice of the fact that it is divisible only in the five forms cited above, and nowhere else. This is what makes the two cited cases su-kṣetriyā and su-gātuyā proper examples. However, the situation with the three additional examples offered by the CAB is different. Why are the compounds sā́ntardeśāḥ, sahásūktavākaḥ, and suprajā́ḥ offered as examples of this rule? The CAB seems to assume that the original compound is sāntar, which is then connected to an indivisible deśa. Similarly, it seems to assume that sahasūkta is an original compound, which is subsequently compounded with an indivisible vākaḥ. Finally, it assumes that supra is the original compound, which is subsequently compounded with an indivisible ja. Such assumptions are difficult to comprehend. We must agree with Whitney: “I do not see how this statement can be accepted as a correct one; for, of the compounds consisting of more than two members, the last is even more often separated from the first two than the first from the last two.” My own guess is that the original CA rule applies appropriately to su- kṣetriyā́ and su-gātuyā́. However, the CAB has mixed up several unrelated rules and their examples. The first two examples are not there in the text of the cited verses, and the verses seem to refer to a slightly different doctrine: “Where there are two possible places for separation, an earlier one and a later one, the separation takes place with the earlier one. This is illustrated by su- kṣetriyā́, sá-antardeśāḥ, and su-prajā́ḥ.” This doctrine has nothing to do with the present rule, and thus the confusion. Here, the words pūrva and para are used in spacial sense, rather than in temporal order in which the compound develops. The disparate nature of these examples is also indicated by the fact that the APR accounts for them in diverse ways. APR (122, p. 83) reads: सु इत्येते- नोपसर्गेण. There is separation of the upasarga su with an avagraha. As ex- amples are offered su-kṣetriyā́ and su-gātuyā́ from AV (4.33.2). One suspects that su-prajā́ḥ (AV 4.11.3) would be accounted for by the same rule. The ex- ample sá-antardeśāḥ (AV 9.5.37) is accounted for under APR (128-129, p. 90) which says that sá-, the reduced form of sahá, is separated with an avagraha. Also see CA (4.1.10) for a different explanation for sahá-sūktavākaḥ and sá-

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 512 antardeśāḥ. The only reason the CAB was able to bring all these examples to- gether is that in all these the separation with an avagraha takes place with the first item. This surface similarity, in addition to the word pūrveṇa in the CA rule and in the cited verse, seems to have led the CAB to bring all these examples together. They could all come together under the rule as phrased in the cited verse, but not under the rule as phrased in CA (4.1.34). ४.१.३५. तद्धिते धा । Whitney (4.13). P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: Dhā́, when it is a taddhita-suffix, [is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तद्धिते परतः धाप्रत्यये अवग्रहो भवति । ‘च॒तुः॒ऽधा । रेतः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.१०.२९)। ‘अ॒ष्ट॒ऽधा । यु॒क्तः’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.३.१९)। ‘न॒व॒ऽधा । हिताः’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.४.१०)। ‘द्वा॒द॒श॒ऽधा’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.११३.३)। व्यत्यय[ः] स्वश्रद्दीर्घेभ्यो धाप्रत्यये न अवग्रहो भवति । Note: Referring to an exception, Whitney says: “On the other hand, the text offers a single exception to the rule, viśvádhā (vi.85.3), which neither the Prātiśākhya nor its commentary notices : it is accented on the penult, while all the other compounds with dhā accent the suffix itself.” Here, it may be noted that, for the viśvádhā yatī́ḥ of the AV text, Sāyaṇa reads viśvadhāyanīḥ, and Paippalāda AV (19.6.3) reads viśvadhāyasaḥ, suggesting that we have here a suspect reading which may not have been known as viśvádhā to the author of the CA or the CAB. Also, referring to the added rule in the commentary, Whitney says: “vyatyayasvaśraddīrghebhyo dhāpratyaye na avagraho bhavati; ‘the suffix dhā does not suffer separation after … (?), sva, śrat, and a long vowel.’ The words svadhā and śraddhā, into which the root dhā enters as last member, are here referred to, and perhaps godhā (iv.3.6); but to what the first item in the enu- meration refers, I have not succeeded in discovering.” The first word, by adding a visarga after it, is nothing but the word vyatyayaḥ, which also appears in Patañjali’s MB (on P.1.4.9, Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., p. 315, etc.) in the sense

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका513 of transposition or deviation. Thus, the cited rule seems to be saying that, in deviation from the normal CA rule, the item dhā is not separated after sva, śrat, and a long vowel. The words śraddhā and svadhā are not analyzed by the Padapāṭha. However, this really cannot be an exception to the normal CA rule, since the present CA rule applies only if dhā is a taddhita affix. Clearly svadhā and śraddhā are not taddhita formations, but derived from the root dhā. For dhā coming after a long vowel, Whitney suggests “perhaps godhā (iv.3.6).” A genuine taddhita formation with a long vowel before dhā is the word tredhā́ (AV 1.12.1) which is not divided by the Padapāṭha with an avagraha, cf. CA (4.2.20). ४.१.३६. त्राकारान्ते । Whitney (4.14). Translation: Also the affix trā, when it ends in ā, [is sepa- rated with an avagraha]. Note: The qualification ākārānte is to distinguish trā from the affix tra. While the former is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha, the latter is not. Whitney makes an important observation: “Doubtless it is the character of the forms to which tra is attached, as being pronominal roots, that prevents its separation from them, rather than anything in the suffix itself. The ablative suffix tas is not separated, even when it follows a word having an independent status in the language, as in abhitas.” चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - त्राप्रत्यये आकारान्ते अवग्रहो भवति । ‘दे॒व॒ऽत्रा । च॒ । कृ॒णु॒हि॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१२.२)। ‘पु॒रु॒ऽत्रा । ते॒ । व॒(H: म)न्व॒ता॒म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१२६.१)। आका- रान्त इति किमर्थम् । ‘यत्र॑ दे॒वा अ॒मृत॑म्’ (अ.वे. २.१.५)। ‘तत्रा॒मृत॑स्य॒ चक्ष॑णम्’ (अ.वे. ५.४.३)। ४.१.३७. थानेकाक्षरेण । Whitney (4.15). O: व्याने°. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correc- tion.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 514 Translation: The affix thā [is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] when [added after a word] of more than one syllable. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - थाप्रत्यये अनेकाक्षरेण पदेन अवग्रहो भवति । ‘ऋ॒तु॒ऽथा । वि । च॒क्ष॒ते॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.१०.२६, VVRI edn.: ९.१५.२६)। ‘ना॒मऽथा॑ । स[ः] । म॒न्ये॒त॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.८.७, VVRI edn.: ११.१०.७)। अनेकाक्षरेणेति किमर्थम् । ‘अध॑ । यथा॑ । नः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.२१)। ‘तथा॑ । तत् । अ॒ग्ने॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२९.२)। Note: Whitney observes: “Here, again, it is evidently not the length of the words to which the suffix is appended, as monosyllables or polysyllables, that determines its separability, but the character of the former as pronominal roots and of the latter as nominal themes.” A crucial example to test Whitney’s assessment might be a word like sarvathā. However, it does not appear in the ŚAV. It appears in Paippalāda AV (9.10.5), but I have not been able to con- sult the Padapāṭha for PAV. ४.१.३८. तरतमयोः । Whitney (4.16). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: Also [the comparative and the superlative af- fixes] -tara and -tama [are separated with an avagraha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तरतमयोश्च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘मधोः॑ । अ॒स्मि॒ । मधु॑ऽतरः । म॒दुघा॑त् । मधु॑मत्ऽतरः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३४.४)। ‘उ॒त्ऽत॒मः । अ॒सि॒ । ओष॑धीनाम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१५.१)। ‘अ॒हम् । अ॒स्मि॒ । य॒शःऽत॑मः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३९.३)। ‘नृ॒णाम् । च॒। भग॑वत्ऽतमः’ (पद, अ.वे. २.९.२)। तरतमयोरिति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒श्व॒- त॒रस्य॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.४.८)। ‘अ॒श्व॒त॒र्यः॑’ (अ.वे. ८.८. २२)। इह कस्मात् (न?) अवग्रहो भवति । ‘कतरः’ ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका515 ‘कतमः’ । ‘यतरः’। ‘यतमः’ । नैतौ स्तः तरतमावन्या- वेतावकारादी प्रत्ययौ । ‘अङ्गस्यात्रादिमात्रं तु(H: उ) शिष्यते लुप्यते परम् । स्वरादी प्रत्ययावेतौ पदत्वं नात्र शिष्यते ॥’ (source?) गोतमः प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः । ‘यौ । गो(H: गौ)त॑म॒म् । अव॑थः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२९.६)। ‘संज्ञायां रूढिशब्दो धा(?) तमोऽ(H: मा)त्रानतिशायने । असमानः स(H: सोम)मुद्रादि- स्तस्मान्नेत्यतिगोतमः (?)॥’ (source?) Note: Referring to the counter-examples aśvatarásya (AV 4.4.8) and aśvataryàḥ (AV 8.8.22), Whitney comments: “The citation of these words in this manner, as if they were excluded by the very form of the rule itself from falling under its operation, suggests as the true reading and interpretation of the rule taratamapoḥ, ‘tara and tama when unaccented,’ giving to the indicatory letter p the same force which it has as appended to the same suffixes by Pāṇini (e.g. v.3.55, 57). My copy of the manuscript, indeed, gives m everywhere taratamayoḥ; but, considering the small difference between y and p when hast- ily formed, I cannot be confident that the Hindu scribe did not mean to write the latter.” Now that we have a large number of manuscripts, Whitney’s ex- pectation is not supported. My guess is that the commentator, in asking the question तरतमयोरिति किमर्थम्, means to suggest that by juxtaposing the affixes tara and tama in this fashion, the rule naturally makes it clear that these words refer to comparative and superlative affixes, and not to just any homophonic affixes. Such an infer- ence excludes aśvatarásya etc., since the affix -tara in this example does not have the meaning of the comparative affix. Then, the commentator takes up the question as to why there is no separation in the forms katará and katamá, yatará and yatamá. This is answered by saying that these are not the affixes -tara and -tama, but a different set of affixes, i.e. -atara and -atama. The verse cited after this says that when an affix like -atara is added, only the initial consonant of the base remains, the rest is deleted, i.e. yat+atara > y+atara > yatara.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 516 Commenting on this discussion, Whitney remarks: “This distinction of the suffixes as applied to pronominal roots from those applied to other themes is evidently artificial and false. The difference is that the roots themselves are not, like derivative themes, detachable from the suffixes appended to them - as we have seen to be the case under the two preceding rules.” Whitney does not note that the commentator is following a standard method, also found in Pāṇi- nian grammar, where these special suffixes are given with a special marker Ḍ, i.e. ḌataraC and ḌatamaC, and by the force of this marker Ḍ, the final portion of the base beginning with its final vowel (= ṬI) is deleted, cf. P.5.3.92 (किंयत्तदो निर्द्धारणे द्वयोरेकस्य डतरच्) and P.5.3.93 (वा बहूनां जातिपरिप्रश्ने डतमच्), P.6.4.143 (टेः). Thus, Pāṇini’s procedure is exactly the same as that given by the CAB. Whitney also misses a major distinction. While the comparative and superlative affixes are unaccented affixes, marked with P by Pāṇini, i.e. -taraP and -tamaP, the affixes in forms like katará and katamá are accented affixes, marked with the marker C by Pāṇini, i.e. ḌataraC and ḌatamaC. Thus, Whitney is not accurate in saying that the distinction of the suffixes as applied to pronominal roots from those applied to other themes is evidently artificial and false. It is a real difference recognized by both Pāṇini and the CAB. The last verse cited by the commentator refers to words in the sa- mudrādigaṇa referred to in CA (4.2.8) and fully listed in APR (217c, examples 59ff). Words in the samudrādigaṇa are not separated by an avagraha in the Padapāṭha. The APR (p. 155) lists gótamaḥ, kataráḥ, katamáḥ, yatarā́, yata- máḥ, aśvatarásya, and aśvataryàḥ in the samudādi gaṇa, and the verse cited by the CAB seems to make a reference to it. However, a substantial portion of the verse remains unintelligible, unless d is read as: tasmān neṅgati gotamaḥ. As the VVRI edition of the AV shows, a number of manuscripts sup- port the reading gautamam for AV (4.29.6). The manuscript H may have de- rived this reading from this tradition. However, looking at the context of the discussion, the reading intended by the CAB must be gotamam. The verse in the commentary points out that the affix -tama in the word gótama is not in the superlative sense (anatiśāyane), and therefore it is not analyzed in the Padapāṭha. For a discussion of the example AV (1.34.4), see the note on CA (2.1. 5). ४.१.३९. मतौ । Whitney (4.17). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका517 Translation: Before the affix matU, [the base is separated in the Padapāṭha with an avagraha]. Note: The affix mat is referred to here as matU, and this marker U is reminiscent of the way Pāṇini mentions this affix: matUP, cf. P.5.2.94 (तदस्या- स्त्यस्मिन्निति मतुप्). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मतौ च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘मधु॑ऽमत्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३४.३)। ‘गोऽम॑त्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.६१)। ४.१.४०. वकारादौ च । Whitney (4.18). O: ककारादौ°. Translation: Also before a v-initial [taddhita affix, the base is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वकारादौ च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अ॒त्रि॒ऽवत् । वः॒ । क्रि॒म॒यः॒ । ह॒न्मि॒ । क॒ण्व॒ऽवत् । ज॒म॒- द॒ग्नि॒ऽवत्’ (पद, अ. वे. २.३२.३)। ‘ऋ॒तऽवा॑नम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३६.१)। ‘स॒त्यऽवा॑नम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२९.१, २)। ‘अश्व॑ऽवान्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.६८.३)। ‘अ॒ञ्जि॒ऽवम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.९)। ‘के॒श॒ऽव[ा]ः’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६. २३)। ‘राण्ऽवतः’ (?)। ‘मार्त॑ऽवत्सम्’(H: वस) (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.२६)। ‘आ॒ऽव॒यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.२६)। ‘वाधू॑ऽयम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.२९)। विनः(H: ज्ञो) प्रतिषेधो वक्तव्यः । ‘द्रु॒वयः॑ । (H: हवयोः) विऽब॑द्धः’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२०.२)। ‘उ॒भ॒या॒विन॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२५.९)। ‘आमयावी’ । ‘मेखलावी’ । ‘मेधावी’ । Note: Referring to the examples mā́rta-vatsam, ā-vayám, and vā́dhū- yam, Whitney says: “He must have been nodding when he added the last three words, of which the third has no suffix beginning with v, and the two others

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 518 are not formed by suffixes, but by composition.” Also see Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 498). As for mā́rtavatsam, it is clear that there is no taddhita affix beginning with v, though clearly the word is a secondary taddhita forma- tion from an original mr̥tavatsa. Contrast with ā-vayám (AV 8.6.26), the indi- visible example ā́vayaḥ (AV 6.16.2). Both of these are specifically mentioned in the APR (217g, p. 158) precisely in the same context. Thus, the examples of the CAB are appropriate as far as their divisibility is concerned, though their grammatical characterizations are not always accurate. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 255) notes that “the pada-text does not divide druváyaḥ, but the case is quoted in the comment to Prāt. iv.18 (= CA 4.1.40) as an exceptional one, vaya being regarded as a suffix added to dru.” However, we should note that the expression druváyaḥ is not listed by the APR in its samudrādi-gaṇa, a list of indivisible words, and hence there is room to speculate whether it was divisible for the APR. Referring to two more examples in the commentary, Whitney says: “It is curious that both ā-vayam and mārta-vatsam are quoted in the commentary to Prāt. iv.18 (= CA 4.1.40), as if their second member were a taddhita beginning with v.” To recognize that the APR and the CAB are genetically linked, we should note that the unattested examples āmayāvī, mekhalāvī, medhāvī quoted by the CAB are also found in APR (p. 156) which lists words whose members are inseparable. The CAB tries to cover these examples with an exception rule, while the APR tries to cover these examples by incorporating them in the samudrādigaṇa, a list of indivisible words. ४.१.४१. शसि वीप्सायाम् । Whitney (4.19). I: 60. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: Also before the affix śas, in the distributive meaning, [the base is separated with an avagraha in the Pada- pāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - शसि परतः वीप्सायाम् अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प॒रु॒ऽशः । क॒ल्प॒य । ए॒न॒म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.४)। ‘धा॒म॒ऽशः । स्था॒त्रे । रे॒ज॒न्ते॒ । विऽकृ॑तानि । रू॒प॒ऽशः’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.९.१६)। वीप्सायामिति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒ङ्कु॒शः’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका519 (पद, अ.वे. ६.८२.३)। ‘की॒नाशाः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१७. ५)। Note: Whitney remarks with respect to the counter-examples in the CAB : “cases which it was very unnecessary to cite, since their suffix, if they have one, is śa, not śas.” However, one may point out that the Prātiśākhya may be looking at a more basic surface level, where the expressions end in śaḥ. The citation kīnā́śāḥ is probably suggestive of the singular form kīnāśaḥ which ends in śaḥ. It may be noted that the APR (p. 139) mentions aṅkuśáḥ in its samu- drādigaṇa, a list of indivisible words, but not kīnā́śāḥ. The APR (p. 137) lists śúnāsīrā, from the same verse (AV 3.17.5) in which the word kīnā́śāḥ appears, among indivisible items. This leaves open a possibility that the APR knew kīnā́śāḥ as a divisible word. ४.१.४२. तातिलि । Whitney (4.20). E, F, I, O: तातये. A, B, C, D: तालिलि. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: Also before the affix tātiL, [the base is sepa- rated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. Note: Pāṇini’s rule 4.4.142 (सर्वदेवात्तातिल्) prescribes the affix tātiL, and interestingly, the CA seems to cite this affix along with its marker L, which indicates that the syllable preceding the suffix is udātta, cf. P.6.1.193 (लिति). Whitney also notes that “the related suffix tā is never separated from the theme to which it is appended.” The verses cited in the CAB under CA (4.1.49) also list tātiL. The word ariṣṭátāti is derived by P.4.4.143 (शिवशमरिष्टस्य करे). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तातिलि परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘म॒ह्यै । अ॒रि॒ष्टऽता॑तये’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.५.५)। ‘ह॒विष्म॑- न्तम् । मा॒ । व॒र्द्ध॒य॒ । ज्ये॒ष्ठऽता॑तये’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३९. १)।

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 520 ४.१.४३. उभयाद् द्युभि । Whitney (4.21). E, F, I, O: °भयाद्युसि. J: °याद्युभिः. P: °याद्युभि. Translation: [The affix] dyuBH [is separated with an ava- graha in the Padapāṭha] after ubhaya. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उभयाद् द्युभि परत अवग्रहो भवति । ‘उ॒भ॒य॒ऽद्युः । अ॒भि॒ऽएति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२५.४)। ‘उ॒भ॒यऽद्युः । उप॑ । ह॒र॒न्ति॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.१०.२१, VVRI edn.: ८.१३.८)। उभयादिति किमर्थम् । ‘यः । अ॒न्ये॒द्युः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२५.४)। ‘अन्यस्य(H: स्या) द्युभि त्वेत्वं स्यादन्यो वा द्यु(H: द्य)भिरिष्यते (?)। लोप एद्युभि चान्त्यस्य सिद्धो वायं पुनर्द्युभि(?)॥’ (ref?) (See the note below for an emended version.) Note: Whitney wonders whether the original reading might have been dyusi, instead of dyubhi, because the indicatory letter bh is not known even in Pāṇini, and that it would be better to assume the stem-form to be dyus. This conjecture is supported by the manuscripts E, F, and I. However, the rest of the manuscripts, and especially the commentary, clearly seem to have the reading dyubhi, and I have retained that reading. The same word appears in the verses cited under CA (4.1.49). Noting that even Pāṇini does not use bh as an indicatory letter, Whitney says: “one is tempted to conjecture that the authors of our system may have regarded dyus in these compounds as a contraction for the instrumental plural dyubhis.” Regarding the verse cited in the CAB, Whitney says: “This evidently has to do with the formation of anyedyus, accounting for the e which precedes the suffix : but I can offer no entirely satisfactory restoration of the text.” My emended text reads as follows: ‘अन्यस्य द्युभि त्वेत्वमन्ये वा द्युभिरिष्यते । लोप एद्युभि चान्त्यस्य सिद्धो वायं पुनर्द्युभि॥’ The verse seems to discuss a number of possible ways of dealing with the derivation of anyedyuḥ. The first quarter of the verse seems to say that

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका521 before the affix dyu, the final vowel of anya changes to e (= etvam). The sec- ond quarter seems to say that one could prescribe the affix dyu after the form anye. The third alternative is to say that the affix is edyu, and that the final vowel of anya is deleted. I cannot however make any clear sense of the last quarter of the verse. We may note that P.5.3.22 offers anyedyuḥ as a nipātana, an unanalyzed word. On the other hand, Kātyāyana in his Vārttika on this rule (6: पूर्वान्यान्यतरेतरापराधरोभयोत्तरेभ्यः एद्युसुच्) suggests the affix edyusUC after words like anya. Adding this affix, also implies the deletion of the final vowel of anya, cf. P.6.4.148 (यस्येति च)Kātyāyana’s Vārttika (7: द्युश्चोभयात्) derives ubhayadyuḥ by adding the affix dyus after the word ubhaya. ४.१.४४. मात्रे च । Whitney (4.22). A, B, D, M, P: omit च. P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: Also before the affix mātra, [the base is sepa- rated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मात्रे च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अ॒ति॒ऽमा॒त्रम् । अ॒व॒र्ध॒न्त॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१९.१)। ‘ये । आ॒त्मान॑म् । अ॒ति॒ऽमा॒त्रम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.१३)। Note: Whitney observes: “This is most palpably a rule which has its ground in the observed phenomena of the general language, and not in those of the Atharva-Veda; for although, in the later language, mātra came to be used in such a mode and sense as to give some ground for its treatment as a suffix, it is in the Atharvan nothing but a noun.” We should note that P.5.2.37 (प्रमाणे द्वयसज्दघ्नञ्मात्रचः) prescribes the affix mātraC, where the marker C ensures that the final syllable of the formation is udātta. Thus, the practice of the Prāti- śākhya is paralleled by that of Pāṇini. It should also be noted that mātra is cited as an affix in the verses quoted in the CAB under CA (4.1.49). ४.१.४५. विश्वाद्दानीमि । Whitney (4.23), C, E, F: °श्वाद्दानीमि. Others: °श्वादानीमि. O: विश्वहानीभि. Translation: After viśva, before the [affix] dānīm, [there is a separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha].

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 522 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विश्वात्(H: न्) दानी(H: री)मि परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘वि॒श्व॒ऽदानी॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.७३.११, VVRI edn.: ७.७७. ११)। विश्वादिति किमर्थम् । ‘त॒दानी॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.८.३९)। Note: Whitney points out: “Here, again, is an instance of a suffix re- maining attached in pada to a pronominal root, while it is separated from a nominal theme (compare under rules 14-16 = CA 4.1.36-8).” The affix -dānīm is listed in the verses in the commentary CAB on CA (4.1.49). ४.१.४६. मयेऽसकारात् । Whitney (4.24). P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: Before [the affix] maya, after [the base] not ending in s, [there is a separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मये परतः असकारात् अवग्रहो भवति। ‘श॒क॒ऽमय॑म् । धमम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.१०.२५, VVRI edn.: ९.१५.२५)। असकारादिति किमर्थम् । ‘अनः॑। म॒न॒स्मय॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.१२)। Note: Whitney notes that manasmayam is the singular example of non-separation. For some reason, the APR does not include this word among its samudrādigaṇa, list of indivisible words, and this raises a possibility that certain traditions may have considered this word as a separable word. This is especially significant since the APR cites other parts of this verse, without noting this peculiarity. Finally, we should note that the affix maya is listed in the verses cited by the CAB on CA (4.1.49). ४.१.४७. के व्यञ्जनात् । Whitney (4.25).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका523 Translation: Before [the affix] ka, after [a base ending in] a consonant, [there is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - के परतः व्यञ्जनात् अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अ॒व॒त्ऽकम्’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३.१)। ‘ए॒ज॒त्ऽकाः’ (अ.वे. ५.२३.७)। व्यञ्जनादिति किमर्थम् । ‘तुण्डि॑कः’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.५)। ‘शि॒प॒वि॒त्नु॒काः’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२३.७)। Note: For Whitney’s comments on avatkám, see Note on CA (1.4. 12). The two counter-examples given by the CAB are the first two examples in a list in the APR (p. 161) under a rule which deals with the same issue from the opposite point of view: स्वरात् कशब्दे नेङ्गयेत्, “after a word ending in a vowel, before the affix ka, there should be no separation.” ४.१.४८. त्वे चान्तोदात्ते । Whitney (4.26). Translation: In a word accented on the final syllable, before the affix tvá, [the base is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - त्वे परतः अन्तोदात्ते अवग्रहो भवति । ‘म॒हि॒ऽत्वा । कस्मै॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२.४)। ‘अ॒मृ॒त॒ऽत्वम् । आ॒न॒शुः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.१०.१, VVRI edn.: ९.१५.१)। ‘शुच॑यः । शु॒चि॒ऽत्वम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३. २८)। अन्तोदात्त इति किमर्थम् । ‘अदि॑तिः । जनि॑त्वम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.६.१)। ‘जनित्वमदितेः परं नेङ्ग्यते कृज्जनपरतः (?)। इत्वो वा स्याज्जनस्तेन पदत्वं नात्र शिष्यते (?)॥’ (source?) इह कस्मात् समासो न भवति । ‘ए॒क॒ऽज॒ । त्वम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३१.३)। ‘म॒हि॒ । त्वम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१.५५)।

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 524 ‘एकज त्वं महि त्वं च तदुभयं [न?] समस्यते । आमन्त्रितं तयोः पूर्वं युष्मद[स्?]त्वं परं पदम् ॥’ (source?) इह कस्मादवग्रहो न भवति । ‘अग्रे(ग्ने?)पित्व’ (?, ‘पि॒त्वो अ॑ग्ने,’ पद * ‘पि॒त्वः । अ॒ग्ने॒,’ अ.वे. ८.४.१०)। ‘तद्धितेऽवग्रहः शिष्टः पदत्वं नात्र शिष्यते । पिबतेस्तन्निबोधत इत्वं छान्दसमिष्यते ॥’ (source?) Note: Whitney understands the first verse cited by the commentator as saying: “janitva following aditi is not to be treated as separable, as being formed from the root jan by the suffix itva, which is not taught to be an ending capable of constituting an independent word.” Cardona (personal communi- cation) suggests that the reading kr̥jjanaparataḥ is to be restored most likely to kr̥jjanaparaḥ or kr̥jjaniparaḥ. Such an emendation allows an overall better in- terpretation for the verse: (my translation): “[In the word] janitva [after the word aditi in AV 7.6.1], the kr̥t [affix tva] after jani is not separated. Or [perhaps, in the word janitva], there is the affix -itva after [the root] jan. There- fore, [jan] is not treated as a [separable] pada.” The second alternative is simi- lar to the one taught by the Uṇādisūtra (4.104) which teaches the affix itvaN after the root jan, where the marker N ensures that the first syllable of the word becomes udātta. This is the explanation offered by Sāyaṇa on AV 7.6.1. With reference to the example mahi tvam, Surya Kanta (APR, Intro- duction, p. 40) appropriately points out Whitney’s error. Somehow, he was unable to trace this example in AV, perhaps because he, for some unexplained reason, treated these two words as one word in his edition of the AV (12.1.55). This was quite clearly an error, and one must read: दे॒वै॒रुक्ता व्यस॑र्पो महि॒ त्वम्. Here the word mahi is a feminine vocative, uncompounded with tvam. In fact, the same matter is explained in the verse cited by the commentary. One should also note that the VVRI edition makes the same mistake as Whitney, and it reads mahitvam as a single word in the Saṃhitā, and mahi-tvam with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha. Assuming that the Padapāṭha as given by the VVRI edition reflects the manuscripts, this error must have been an old error, and we need not fault Whitney. The context, however, supports the in- terpretation of mahi as a vocative followed by the separate word tvam.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका525 Whitney interprets the third verse cited in the commentary as saying that the word pitva is derived from the root pā with the Vedic suffix itva. I doubt if this is what the verse means. The verse teaches the derivation from the root pā , and then says that the ā of the root changes to i and that this change is irregular, i.e. Vedic. The word itvam in the verse does not refer to an affix - itva, but to the change of ā to i. As evidenced by Sāyaṇa’s commentary on AV (8.4.10), the word pitvaḥ is a genitive singular of the stem pitu- and is para- phrased by Sāyaṇa with the word annasya. The discussion is occasioned by the fact that, on the face of it, the word has the element tva, and it is udātta, and hence it should be subject to this rule. The verse points out that there is no taddhita affix in this form, and hence it is not subject to the present rule. ४.१.४९. कृत्वे समासो वा नानापददर्शनात् । Whitney (4.27). B, J, M, P: °दर्शितात्. A, B: तत्वे समासो°. Ha: क्तसमासो वा°. P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: The affix kr̥tva is optionally compounded, since one diversely sees it separated or not as an independent word. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - कृत्वे अवग्रहो भवति । कुतः नानापददर्शनात् । ‘च॒तुः । नमः॑ । अ॒ष्ट॒ऽकृत्वः॑ । भ॒वाय॑ । दश॑ । कृत्वः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.२.९)। ‘त्रिः । स॒प्त । कृत्वः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.२९)। नन्वेवं कथम् । व्य- वस्थितेन विकल्पेन वाशब्देन प्रतिपादितत्वात् । तथा हि । ‘करोतेर्दशसप्तभ्यां त्वशब्दः कृद्विधीयते । संख्याया अनुदात्ताया अष्टशब्दात्समस्यते ॥ उदात्तात् दश सप्तेति एवं पूर्वेण विग्रहः । धाप(H: य)र्यन्तास्तद्धिता ये तेष्वेवावग्रहो भवेत् ॥ अतोऽन्येन पद(H: दे)त्वेऽपि युवत्यादिषु तद्धितम् । धा-त्रा(H: त्वा)-था(H: प्या)-तातिलि-शसि- दानीम्-तरतमौ(H: मो)-मतुप् । व-मात्र-द्युभि(H: ति)-के-त्वापि मयट्-कृत्वेष्ववग्रहः ॥’ (source?)

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 526 Note: On some occasions, kr̥tvas is separated as an independent word in the Padapāṭha, for example dáśa / kŕ̥tvaḥ (AV 11.2.9) and saptá / kŕ̥tvaḥ (AV 12.2.29). On the other hand, it is compounded with a number word in some instances, i.e. aṣṭa-kŕ̥tvaḥ (AV 11.2.9). The CA rule simply says that this happens optionally because of the diverse behavior in the Padapāṭha. The CAB looks at the same situation and says that this is a case of vyavasthitavibhāṣā “settled option,” namely that in certain known cases the compounding takes place, and in certain other known cases it does not, and it is not that in each case the compounding is optional. This is further supported by the fine analysis presented in the first cited verse. It says that the item kŕ̥tvaḥ, which is an accented item, is compounded with unaccented number words like aṣṭa. However, it is not compounded with accented number words saptá and dáśa. This goes far beyond the rule of the CA in providing a rational reason for the diverse behavior of this item. Also note the use of the word samāsa for a juncture of a taddhita affix in the CA rule. On the other hand, perhaps to get over this oddity, the cited verse does not treat kr̥tvas as a taddhita affix, but as a verbal noun, derived from the root kr̥ with the kr̥t affix -tva. This makes it seem more like a normal compound in Pāṇini- an terms. This perhaps shows that the cited verses are more sensitive to the categories of the Pāṇinian grammar. Also note that the forms in which the affixes are cited in the verses are closer to their Pāṇinian forms, cf. matup and mayaṭ, P.5.2.94 (तदस्यास्त्यस्मिन्निति मतुप्) and P.5.4.21 (तत्प्रकृतवचने मयट्). The CA rules (4.1.39) and (4.1.46) refer to matu and maya, rather than to matup and mayaṭ. The recognition that the last verse quoted in the commentary provides an enumeration of all the suffixes thus far treated of as separable allows us to reconstruct the text of that verse in a much more satisfactory way, in spite of the sorry state of the manuscript. As a parallel to युवत्यादिषु तद्धितम् in the cited verses, we find युवत्यादिषु तद्धिते in APR (217a). The wording धापर्यन्ताः in our verses here may have a parallel in धोपनतेः in APR (217a). ४.१.५०. जातीयादिषु च । Whitney (4.28). C, M: this rule comes before CA 4.1.49. O omits च. Translation: Also, [there is separation of the base with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] before [the affixes] such as -jātīya.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका527 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जातीयादिषु च परतः अवग्रहो भव- ति । ‘पटुऽजातीयः’ । ‘मृदुऽजातीयः’ । ‘पण्डितऽजातीयः’ । ‘शोभनऽजातीयः’ । ‘भा॒ग॒ऽधेय॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१११.१)। ‘रूपऽधेयम्’ (रू॒प॒ऽधेया॑नि, पद, अ.वे. २.२६.१)। ‘ना॒म॒ऽ- धेय॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.१०९.६, VVRI edn.: ७.११४.६)। Note: Surya Kanta (APR, Intro., p. 39) points to the fact that the ex- amples of jātīya are not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and argues that, there- fore, the Vulgate is not a genuine Śaunakīya recension, suggesting that examples of jātīya must have occurred in a genuinely Śaunakīya text. However, as Whitney notes, the examples of jātīya cited by the commentator are identical with examples appearing in commentaries on Pāṇini (5.3.69: प्रकारवचने जातीयर्). This would suggest that even the commentator did not find any examples in the AV text known to him, and got his examples from his exposure to the Pāṇinian tradition. It is thus very likely that the Gaṇa jātīyādi itself was not a purely Atharvan Gaṇa, but was taken by the author of the CA from some general grammar of Sanskrit. Whitney says: “What other fre- quently occurring final members of compounds it may have pleased the authors of our treatise to regard as suffixes, and to include in this gaṇa, I do not know. I have noted no actual suffixes as needing to be comprehended in it.” It must be noted, however, that this general grammar used as a source of information by the author of CA was not identical with Pāṇini’s grammar in every respect. Thus, Pāṇini himself treats jātīya as an affix, and not as a separate word forming a compound with another word. The CA, on the other hand, thinks of some affixes being compounded with their bases. Also, there is no jātīyādigaṇa in Pāṇini’s grammar. ४.१.५१. यादाविच्छायां स्वरात् कर्मनामतन्मानिप्रेप्सुषु । Whitney (4.29). A, B, D: °कर्मेनाम°. A, B: °नामे°. I numbers यादाविछायां as 70, and स्वरात् as 71. E, F, O: °स्वस्वरात्°. P places a daṇḍa after कर्मनाम. Translation: [There is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] after [a base ending in] a vowel, before a y-initial desire-expressing [affix], in verbal nouns, derivatives in the sense of “thinks of oneself like x,” and agent nouns in the sense of “desirous of doing x.”

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 528 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यादौ इच्छायां स्वरात् अवग्रहो भवति कर्मनामतन्मानिप्रेप्सुषु । ‘अ॒ध्व॒रि॒ऽय॒ताम्’ (पद, ‘अ॒ध्व॒री॒य॒- ताम्,’ संहिता, अ.वे. १.४.१)। ‘अ॒घ॒ऽयुः’ (पद, ‘अ॒घा॒युः,’ संहिता, अ.वे. ४.३.२)। ‘वृ॒ष॒ऽयमा॑नः’ (पद, ‘वृ॒षा॒यमा॑णः,’ संहिता, अ.वे. २.५.७)। ‘श॒त्रु॒ऽय॒तीम् । अ॒भि’ (पद, ‘श॒त्रू॒य॒तीम॒भि,’ संहिता, अ.वे. ३.१.३)। यादाविति किमर्थम् । ‘तत् । सि॒सा॒स॒ति॒’ (पद, ‘तत्सि॑षासति॒,’ संहिता, अ.वे. १३.२.१४)। स्वरादिति किमर्थम् । ‘येन॑ । श्र॒व॒स्य॒वः॒’ (पद, ‘येन॑ श्रवस्यवः॒,’ संहिता, अ.वे. ३.९.४)। Note: Whitney remarks: “Not one of the technical terms used in this rule is known to me to occur elsewhere than in the grammatical language of our treatise. … Karmanāma, then, I have without much hesitation rendered by ‘participle;’ and tanmānin seems to me to mean ‘implying the making or doing of that which the theme indicates,’ and so to be applicable to such words as śatrūyanti, aghāyanti, where the signification is not simply desiderative : but of this I do not feel altogether confident, and I have at one time sought in the word a designation of the middle participles having the termination māna; prepsu I think must belong to such derivative adjectives as devayu, śravasyu.” The term karmanāma is found in the Nirukta (2.13) in the sense of action-noun, e.g. व्रतमिति कर्मनाम, as contrasted with sattvanāma ‘noun referring to an object,’ Nirukta (1.1). The word karmanāma probably has an extended sense of a noun derived from a verb, as evidenced by the fact that it is used to refer to such words as apaḥ, apnaḥ, daṃsaḥ etc., cf. Nirukta (3.1): कर्म- नामान्युत्तराणि षड्विंशतिः. Its further derivative कार्मनामिकः (संस्कारः) is also found in the Nirukta (1.13) where it refers to a proper derivation of a noun from a verb. Durga’s commentary on this passage says: कर्मकृतं नाम कर्मनाम । पाचक- लावकादि । तस्मिन् भवः कार्मनामिकः संस्कारः. Here, in the CA rule, Whitney may be correct in assuming that the word is used in a more restricted sense of participle. The expression tan-mānin is not found elsewhere in grammar, but its meaning is similar to the meaning of आत्ममाने in Pāṇini (3.2.83: आत्ममाने खश्च). Examples of this rule, such as दर्शनीयमानिन्, mean दर्शनीयमात्मानं मन्यते, namely, ‘though someone is actually not good-looking, he thinks himself to be good-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका529 looking.’ This type of meaning is ascribed to the forms vr̥ṣāyámāṇaḥ and śatrūyátīm, i.e. acting like x. The word prepsu simply means ‘desirous,’ and is exemplified by aghāyúḥ and śravasyavaḥ. For a related rule and examples, see: CA (3.1.18: इच्छायां च यकारादौ), and APR (154: यकारादौ बहुलं दीर्घः). The examples in the CAB on the present rule are identical with the examples on APR (154). ४.१.५२. वस्ववस्वप्नसुम्नसाधुभिर्या । Whitney (4.30). A, B, D, P: °सुन्म°. J, M: वस्ववच°. Translation: [There is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the affix] yā combined with vasu, ava, svapna, sumna, and sādhu. Note: The verse cited in the CAB reports Śākaṭāyana’s view that separation with an avagraha occurs only in five words involving yā. The enu- meration, both in the CA rule and in the cited verse, is important because yā is not separated with an avagraha in other instances, e.g. su-kṣetriyā́ and su- gātuyā́ in AV (4.33.2). These two words are offered as instances in the CAB on CA (4.1.34). There are other words ending in -yā́ are not divisible and are listed in the APR (p. 154-3) as members of the samudrādi-gaṇa, a list of indivisible words, e.g. mithuyā́ (AV 4.29.7), amuyā́ (AV 5.22.1), bhadráyā (AV 3.30.3), urviyā́ (AV 5.12.5). Here, bhadráyā has been included with other forms, and yet its different accentuation shows that it is a different kind of word. It is not clear why the division takes place in some words, and not in others. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वसुअवस्वप्नसुम्न(H: प्त)साध्वित्येतैः सह याशब्दे परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘व॒सु॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३३.२)। ‘अ॒व॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३५.१)। ‘स्व॒प्न॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.७.८)। ‘सु॒म्न॒(H: प्त)ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. ७. ५५.१)। ‘सा॒धु॒ऽया’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.४.२१)।

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 530 ‘पञ्चैवावग्रहानाह याशब्दे शाकटायनः । अन्तोदात्तः पदत्वं च विभक्तयर्थे भवेत्तु या ॥’ (source?) Note: On the example ava-yā, Whitney rightly says: “The second of them is classed with the rest only by a blunder, since it is evidently avayās, the irregular nominative singular of ava-yāj, and ought to be written by the pada- text ava-yāḥ, instead of ava-yā.” While Whitney is philologically correct, the form as sanctioned by the CA indicates that the form was understood differ- ently by the Indian tradition. The VVRI edition reads अ॒व॒ऽयाः, but notes the manuscript variant अ॒व॒ऽया. Sāyaṇa reads अवयाः and refers to P.8.2.67 for the nipātana of the form अवयाः. The example sumna-yā is cited under APR (7, ex- ample 31). The VVRI edition reads सु॒ऽगा॒तु॒या for AV (4.33.2), but notes the manuscript variant सु॒गा॒तु॒ऽया, and also refers to the Padapāṭha of the RV for this alternative division. This may also be a possible influence from the RV tradi- tion on some AV reciters. Referring to sumnayā́ in AV 7.55.1, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 425) remarks: “The construction seems so decidedly to call for a locative in c that sumnayā́ (p. sumna-yā́, by Prāt. iv. 30 = CA 4.1.52) is rendered as if it were for -yāú, from -yú; the comm. glosses it with sumne sukhe.” Looking at the verse cited in the commentary, it seems that this rule rep- resents a practice which was instituted by Śākaṭāyana. The rule makes no ref- erence to Śākaṭāyana, but the commentary makes this clear. This is somewhat similar to CA 1.1.10, cf. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary on CA 1.1.10. ४.१.५३. भिर्भ्यांभ्यःसु । Whitney (4.31). A, B, D, J, P: भिभ्यांभ्यः°. Translation: Before the affixes bhiḥ, bhyām, and bhyaḥ, [the base is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - भिर्भ्यांभ्यःसु परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प॒ञ्चऽभिः॑ । अ॒ङ्गुलि॑ऽभिः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१४.७)। ‘उ॒रुऽ- भ्या॑म् । ते॒ । अ॒ष्ठीवद्ऽभ्या॑म् । पार्ष्णि॑ऽभ्याम् । प्रऽप॑दाभ्याम्’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका531 (पद, अ.वे. २.३३.५)। ‘अ॒स्थिऽभ्यः॑ । ते॒ । म॒ज्जऽभ्यः॑ । स्नाव॑ऽभ्यः । ध॒मनि॑ऽभ्यः’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३३.६)। Note: For a related rule, see APR (218: दीर्घाद्भिर्भ्यांभ्यःसु) which com- bines into one rule CA (4.1.53) and CA (4.1.55). However, the APR rule prohibits the separation after a base ending in a long vowel, before these af- fixes. ४.१.५४. सौ च । Whitney (4.32). P has no daṇḍa after this rule. Translation: Also, before the [locative plural affix] su, [the base is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सौ च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अंह॑ऽसु’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.३५.२)। ‘अ॒प्ऽसु’ (पद, अ.वे. १. ४.४)। ‘व॒यम् । राज॑ऽसु’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.५०.७, VVRI edn.: ७.५२.७)। Note: On the expression áṃhasu (AV 6.35.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 307) remarks: “The translation [= ‘in our distresses’] given implies that áṅhasu (which is read by all the mss. without exception, and is quoted so in the commentary to Prāt. iv.32 [= CA 4.1.54]) is the same with the usual áṅhaḥsu; no stem áṅhan is found anywhere else. The commentary foolishly explains it by abhigantavyeṣu, adj. to uktheṣu.” For an identically worded rule, see APR (218b: सौ च). However, like APR (218: दीर्घाद्भिर्भ्यांभ्यःसु), APR (218b) says that after a base ending in a long vowel, there is no separation with an avagraha before su. ४.१.५५. न दीर्घात् । Whitney (4.33). P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: There is no [separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of bhis, bhyām, bhyas, and su] after [a base ending in] a long vowel.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 532 Note: See the Notes on the preceding two rules for comparison with the APR. Whitney points out: “No case ending is separable after a long final vowel, whether this be an original long final of the theme, or the result of a prolongation according to the rules of declension.” This prohibition is there, perhaps, because it is difficult to tell immediately whether the long vowel is an original one or lengthened before the affix. Thus, it fits the notion of sandeha ‘confusion, lack of clarity’ as a reason for not separating parts of a word, cf. CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न दीर्घात् अवग्रहो भवति भिस्भ्यां- भ्यःसु परतः सौ च । ‘याभिः॑ । स॒त्यम् । भव॑ति’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.२.२५)। ‘ताभिः॑ । त्वम् । अ॒स्मान्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.२.२५)। ‘अ॒क्षीभ्या॑म् । ते॒। नासि॑काभ्याम् । कर्णा॑- भ्याम्’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३३.१)। ‘गोभ्यः॑ । अश्वे॑भ्यः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२८.३)। ‘आ॒सु । इत॑रासु’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१०. ४)। ४.१.५६. विनामे च । Whitney (4.34). A, B: व for च. Translation: [No separation of su takes place] also when there is the change of s [of su] to ṣ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विनामे च परतः न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प्रति॑ । ति॒ष्ठ॒ । दि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१४.९)। ‘न॒म॒स्यः॑ । वि॒क्षु(H: र्विष्णु) । ईड्यः॑’(पद, अ.वे. २.२.१)। ‘मानु॑षीषु । दि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.११.८)। ‘म॒रु॒तः॒ । वि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.४.१८)। ‘यम् । च॒ । वि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.१९)। ‘परि॑ । प॒श्य॒ । वि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.३.१०)। ‘सु॒ऽवृ॒जना॑सु। दि॒क्षु’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.४६)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका533 ४.१.५७. वसौ ह्रस्वात् । Whitney (4.35). Most mss. read र्ह for ह्र. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: After [the base ending in] a short [vowel], be- fore [the affix] vasU, [the base is separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वसौ परतः ह्रस्वात् अवग्रहो भवति । ‘च॒कृ॒ऽवान्’ (पद, अ.वे. २.३५.३)। ‘प॒पि॒ऽवान्’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.३)। ह्रस्वात् किम् । ‘वि॒द्वान्’ (अ.वे. २.१. २)। ‘अपदेऽवग्रहः शिष्ट इकारेण पदादिना । धात्वन्ताच्च वसौ ह्रस्वाच्चकृवान् पपिवानिति ॥ उपसर्गसमासेऽपि वसावेवावगृह्यते । किकिनावविशेषेण भूते ताभ्यां विधीयते ॥ वसु[ः] स्वार्थे तयो[ः] ल[H: लु]ब्धं बहुलं छन्दसीति च । वा तयोः कृतोः समासश्चो[Whitney: साच्चा]पजायेत वस्तुतः ॥ अवकारे पदत्वं न पूर्वेणैवावगृह्यते । अह्रस्वेऽपि पदत्वं स्यात् प्राप्तस्तत्राप्यवग्रहः ॥ अह्रस्वे छान्दसत्वात्तु रुत्वमाहुर्मनीषिणः ।’ (source?) Note: About the verses cited in the commentary, Whitney remarks: “The meaning of some of these lines is very clear, and they are seen to cover the ground of our present rule and of the two following : others are obscure, and need emendation before they can be intelligently rendered.” However, now we can indeed make better sense of these verses. They provide further insights into how some of these derivations were viewed by this tradition. The form cakr̥-vā́n did not pose a major problem because the base cakr̥ is viewed as naturally ending in a short vowel. However, the form papi-vā́n did apparently pose a problem. In this form, this tradition did not believe that the root ended in i. The element papi- was viewed as being made up of pap

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 534 [from +pā] followed by an affix i. This affix i is identified in the verses with the affixes Ki or KiN prescribed by P.3.2.171 (आदृगमहनजनः किकिनौ लिट् च), which yields forms like papi, dadi, jagmi. The cited verse says that the affix vasU is added to pap-i, to express no additional meaning, but that of the base (svārthe), to yield pap-i-vas, cf. P.3.2.107 (क्वसुश्च). The KV on this rule offers the examples jakṣivān and papivān. By the convention बहुलं छन्दसि (= e.g. P.3.2.88), which says that grammatical rules apply diversely in Vedic texts, the two kr̥t affixes i and vasU are compounded into ivasU, cf. वा तयोः कृतोः समासश्चोपजायेत तत्वतः. Thus, the vowel i in pap+ivas occurs at the beginning of the pada, i.e. ivas, rather than at the end of the preceding base, and yet in this exceptional case, an avagraha has been prescribed after i of ivas, cf. अपदेऽवग्रहः शिष्टः इकारेण पदादिना. We should note that the standard Pāṇinian tradition derives the forms jakṣivān and papivān differently from the process outlined here in these verses, cf. Nyāsa on KV on P.3.2.107: जक्षिवानिति । ‘लिट्यन्यतरस्याम्’ (पा.२.४.४०) इत्य- देर्घस्लादेशः, ‘वस्वेकाजाद्घसाम्’ (पा.७.२.६७) इतीट्, ‘घसिभसोर्हलि च’ (पा.६.४.१००) इत्युपधालोपः, … पपिवानिति । पा पाने । पूर्ववदिट् । ‘आतो लोप इटि च’ (पा.६.४.६४) इत्याकारलोपः. The important point to note is that the Pāṇinian tradition does not view these formations as containing Ki or KiN followed by vasU, but as formations with the affix KvasU, with an initial augment iṬ. The line उपसर्गसमासेऽपि वसावेवावगृह्यते teaches the same rule as CA (4.1.58). The line अवकारे पदत्वं न पूर्वेणैवावगृह्यते teaches the same rule as CA (4.1.59). The final verse seems to relate to those forms where vas is preceded by a long vowel (ahrasva), such as jigīvā́n (AV 4.22.6), which is not split in the Padapāṭha. The last line seems to refer to the fact that the Padapāṭha form jigīvā́n appears as jigīvā̃́ in the Saṃhitāpāṭha through the irregular Vedic (छान्दसत्वात्) change of the final n to rU (रुत्वम्) [rU > y > Ø], with the con- comitant nasalization of the preceding vowel, cf. P.8.3.7 (नश्छव्यप्रशान्), P.8.3.8 (उभयथर्क्षु), and P.8.3.2 (अत्रानुनासिकः पूर्वस्य तु वा). Note that CA (4.1.57) uses the expression vasu-, where the final u is a marker sound, similar to Pāṇinian usage. Such markers are, however, nowhere defined in the CA. The verses cited by the commentary show a thorough fa- miliarity with the Pāṇinian system. They use the Pāṇinian expressions Ki- Kinau and rU. ४.१.५८. तेनैवोपसृष्टेऽपि । Whitney (4.36). E, F, Ha, O: °स्पृष्टे°.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका535 Translation: Even when [the verb is compounded] with a preverb (upasarga), the separation [with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha takes place] with that [affix vasU] alone. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तेनैव अवग्रहो भवति । उपसृष्टेऽपि वसौ । ‘प॒रे॒यि॒ऽवांस॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.४९)। ‘प्र॒वि॒शि॒ऽ- वांस॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२३.१)। ‘ज॒क्षि॒ऽवांसः॑, प॒पि॒ऽवांसः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९७.३, VVRI edn.: ७.१०२.३)। ‘उ॒त्त॒स्थि॒ऽ- वांसः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.९३.१)। Note: As Whitney notes, the examples jakṣi-vāṃsaḥ and papi-vāṃsaḥ are wrongly included here in the CAB perhaps by the mistake of the copyist. The rule applies to verbs with preverbs. A verse cited in the CAB on CA (4.1.57) teaches the same rule: उपसर्गसमासेऽपि वसावेवावगृह्यते. ४.१.५९. उपसर्गेणावकारे । Whitney (4.37). A, B, C: °र्ग्रे°. O: उपसर्गेणवकारे. Translation: Also, when [the affix vasU appears as] non-v- initial [i.e. us, the separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] applies to the preverb (upasarga). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उपसर्गेण अवग्रहो भवति अवकारादपि वसौ । ‘आ॒ऽज॒ग्मुषः॑ । अ॒नु॒ऽम॒ते॒’ (पद, अ.वे. २.२६.२)। ‘व॒शा । प्र॒ऽद॒दुषे॑ । दु॒हे॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.४.३५)। ‘यदा प्रसारणं तस्य पदत्वं नेष्यते तदा । पूर्वेणावग्रहः सिद्धो यतः तज्जीयते पदम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Whitney says: “That is to say, when the suffix is contracted into uṣ, in the weak forms of declension, it is no longer separable, and the ava- graha remains where it was before, between the preposition and the verb.” This rule is also stated in the verse cited in the CAB on CA (4.1.57): अवकारे पदत्वं न पूर्वेणैवावगृह्यते. The verse cited in the CAB on the present rule is ren-

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 536 dered by Whitney as: “when the suffix suffers contraction, its capability of standing as an independent pada is not taught : the former constituent then maintains the avagraha, as having a superior right to it (?).” The word prasāraṇa in the verse is identical with samprasāraṇa of Pāṇini 1.1.45 (इग्यणः सम्प्रसारणम्), and is better translated as ‘expansion [e.g. of v into u],’ rather than as ‘contraction.’ It should also be noted that there is no avagraha in forms like ábibhyuṣīḥ (AV 3.14.3) and babhūvúṣī (AV 9.10.21), because in these forms too the original affix vas changes to us. The form babhūvúṣī is especially in- teresting, because, here seemingly there is an affixal element vúṣī, beginning with v. We do not know exactly how the Prātiśākhya tradition conceptualized the derivation of such a form. However, Pāṇini prescribes an end-augment vUK to the root, cf. P.6.4.88 (भुवो वुग्लुङ्लिटोः), giving us the division babhūv+ úṣī, leaving the affix as a non-v-initial form of the original vasU. ४.१.६०. समन्तः पूरणे । Whitney (4.38). I: 80. Translation: The word samanta, [only] in the sense of ‘full,’ [is split with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समन्त इति पूरणार्थेऽवग्रहो भवति । ‘पु॒ष्क॒रिणीः॑ । सम्ऽअ॑न्ताः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३४.५)। ‘सम्ऽ- अ॑ग्रः । सम्ऽअ॑न्तः। भया॒स॒म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.८१.४)। पूरण इति किमर्थम् । ‘यथा॑ । वृ॒क्षम् । लिबु॑जा । स॒म॒न्तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.८.१)। समन्तं सर्वतोऽर्थेऽन्तोदात्तं नावगृह्यते। आद्युदात्तमवगृह्यते । पूरणार्थे - ‘पु॒ष्क॒रिणीः॑ । सम्ऽअ॑न्ताः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३४.५)। Note: Whitney faults the commentator for making pseudo-semantic distinctions between the two uses of the word samanta. He translates the word pūraṇa as ‘completion’ and sarvataḥ as ‘wholly.’ Thus translated, the mean- ings are indeed not sufficiently distinct. However, pūraṇa rather refers to being full, endowed with everything. On the other hand, the expression sarvataḥ refers to ‘on all sides.’ This is the distinction intended by the commentator,

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका537 and it is a valid distinction. Sāyaṇa, on AV (6.8.1), paraphrases the word samantam with sarvataḥ, while, on AV (7.81.4), he paraphrases the same word with sampūrṇa. The passage समन्तः सर्वतोऽर्थेऽन्तोदात्तं नावगृह्यते, आद्युदात्तमवगृह्यते पूरणार्थे is comparable to APR (p. 157). ४.१.६१. अनतौ विसंभ्यां प्राणाख्या चेत् । Whitney (4.39). B, C, J, M, P: Daṇḍa after विसंभ्यां. A, D, E, F, H, O, P: अनंतौ. I: अनितौ. Translation: After the [preverbs] vi and sam, before the [forms of the verb-root] an, [there is separation with an ava- graha in the Padapāṭha], if [the resulting word is] a name of [one of] the breaths. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन(H: नं)तौ वि सम् इत्येताभ्याम् अवग्रहो भवति । प्राणाख्या चेद् गम्यमाना(H: ने) । ‘वि॒ऽ- आ॒नः(H: नं) । आयुः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.२.४६)। ‘स॒म्ऽ- आ॒नम् । अ॒स्मि॒न् । कः’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.२.१३)। विसं- भ्यामिति किमर्थम् । ‘प्राणोऽपानः’ (?, ‘प्रा॒णो अ॑पा॒नः,’ पद * ‘प्रा॒णः । अ॒पा॒नः’, अ.वे. १८.२.४६)। प्राणाख्या चेदिति किमर्थम् । ‘स॒मा॒नम् । अ॒स्तु॒ । वः॒ । मनः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.६४.३)। Note: Whitney remarks: “We should have expected this rule to be stated the other way; namely, that the root an was not separated from pra and apa (in the compounds prāṇa and apāna, which are always thus written in pada, without division). This would, one the one hand, be theoretically preferable, since the general rules for division would lead us to expect the pada readings pra-āna, apa-āna, vi-āna, and sam-āna, and we therefore ought to have the first two denied, rather than the last two ratified, by a special rule : and, on the hand, it would be practically more accurate, since udāna, which occurs in the combi- nation vyāna-udānau, is doubtless a separable compound, and is in fact so re- garded by the commentator, under rule 42 (= CA 4.1.64) below. Why prāṇa and apāna should not also be divided, it is far from easy to see.”

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 538 Note that the AV form is prāṇati corresponding to the RV and the Classical form prāṇiti. This justifies the wording of this rule, e.g. anatau. The reading anitau found in the manuscript I is either under the influence of the R̥gvedic tradition or an unconscious classicalization. Also see: CA (4.2.11: प्राणति प्राणन्ति). The discussion in the commentary that the word vyānaḥ is sepa- rated in the pada-text with an avagraha, but the words prāṇa and apāna are not so separated matches with what we find in the mss. of the Padapāṭha. How- ever, it is not immediately clear why such should be the case. One possibility is that the divisions of these two words were easily perceived in a natural pro- nunciation of vyāna as vi(y)āna and of samāna as sam āna. On the other hand, no such natural separation was possible in the pronunciation of the words prāṇa and apāna. This seems to have been the explanation offered by the APR (p.135: प्राणोऽपानति वेदितः प्रापाभ्यां दीर्घसंशयात्). If one is to venture an explana- tion beyond this statement, one could say that such a state of affairs reflects a very early phase in the development of ideas about sandhi, and the Padakāras have shied away from those cases of possible segmentation which might have involved what the CA calls sandeha, cf. CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्). The word sandeha obviously have both the meanings, fusion and confusion! Some examples of the CAB are found in APR (p. 157). Also compare the formulation of APR (217f, p. 157): समानमस्मिन्को देव (अ.वे. १०.२.१३) इत्येतदेवावगृह्यते । अतोऽन्यानि समानानि नेङ्गयेत्सर्वदा कविः ॥ ४.१.६२. काम्याम्रेडितयोः । Whitney (4.40). A, B, D: °म्यांम्रे°. J, M, P: कम्यांम्रे°. Translation: [There is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] before the [affix] kāmya and [before] a repeated word. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - काम्ये च परतः आम्रेडिते च अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अ॒श्र॒द्धाः । ध॒न॒ऽका॒म्या’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.५१)। ‘अनृ॑तम् । वि॒त्त॒ऽका॒म्या’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३.५२)। ‘भूयः॑ऽ- भूयः । श्वःऽश्वः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.६.५)। Note: It is clear that the author of the Padapāṭha separates kāmyā with an Avagraha. While Pāṇini treats this as a case of affixation (e.g. kāmyaC ), cf.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका539 P.3.1.9 (काम्यच्च), the CA treats this as a case of an affix being compounded with its base. Whitney remarks: “This is a strange rule. In the first place, the Atharva-Veda furnishes no ground whatever for the treatment of kāmya as a suffix, even though it be regarded as such in certain combinations in the gen- eral grammatical system (see Pāṇ. iii.1.9 etc.). We find it only in such com- pounds as the commentator instances, which would fall under rule 9 of this chapter (= CA 4.1.31) without occasioning any difficulty or hesitation. In the second place, I can discover no possible reason for combining together in one rule things so utterly unconnected and incongruous as the occurrence of this suffix and that of words repeated in an emphatic or a distinctive sense. The dual termination, however, is our warrant that we have not here, as in the case of rules 12 and 13 of the first chapter (= CA 1.1.14-15), two rules written and explained together by the commentator.” It may be observed that CA (4.1.31: समासे च) seems to refer to combi- nations which are traditionally considered to be samāsa ‘compounds’ by the systems of general grammar. However, the CA considers many cases of af- fixation as cases of compounding, since the members are so separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha. One may assume that traditions of general gram- mar, such as reflected in Pāṇini’s grammar, had already classified kāmya as an affix, and the CA was simply responding to such a classification by including it here as a case of affixal compound. As for the āmreḍita ‘repeated word,’ the CAB on CA (2.3.2) uses the term āmreḍita-samāsa to refer to paraḥparaḥ in AV (12.3.39). The CA inclu- sion of āmreḍita here indicates a concern that this is not considered to be a compound (samāsa) by the traditional general grammars of Sanskrit, and hence needs to be included explicitly. K.V. Abhyankar in his own recent work on the Padapāṭha formulates a rule: द्विर्वचनवृत्तौ समासवदवग्रहः, (Abhyankar, 1974, p. 19). Note here the expression samāsavat, which suggests a similar hesitation about using the term samāsa to refer to such a phenomenon. Abhyankar brings it under a wider category of vr̥tti, which may be translated as ‘composition,’ to distinguish it from a narrower notion of compound. See my note on CA (2.3.2). Also see George Cardona, “Āmreḍita compounds?,” appearing in Professor Paul Thieme Festschrift. ४.१.६३. इवे च । Whitney (4.41). Translation: Also, before iva, [the preceding word is sepa- rated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha].

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 540 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इवे च परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘सा॒ला॒वृ॒कान्ऽइ॑व’ (पद, अ.वे. २.२७.५)। Note: It is clear that the CA suspected that the combination of iva with the preceding word may not be included in the traditional notion of com- pound, and hence needed to be mentioned separately. Pāṇini had clearly not intended this to be a compound. However, under the pressure of the Prātiśākhya tradition, Kātyāyana suggests that compounding with iva be ac- cepted by the grammarians, cf. Vārttika: इवेन विभक्तयलोपः पूर्वपदप्रकृतिस्वरत्वं च, on P.2.1.4 (सह सुपा)i this Vārttika explicitly uses the term samāsa: इवेन सह समासो विभक्तयलोपः पूर्वपदप्रकृतिस्वरत्वं च वक्तव्यम्, MB, (Kielhorn edn., Vol. I., p. 378). Here, the word vaktavyam is significant in that it indicates that this is a new prescription, not available from Pāṇini’s rules. ४.१.६४. मिथोऽवगृह्ययोर्मध्यमेन । Whitney (4.42). B, D: °ध्येमेन. C, J, M, P: °मध्येन. O: °थोवावगृ°. P: no daṇḍa after this rule. Translation: The separation [with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha is effected at the juncture] in between two separable [compound-expressions, when they are further joined to form a new compound]. Note: For example, āñjana is separable as ā-añjana and abhyañjana is separable as abhi-añjana. When these two are further compounded, their new joint is separated in the Padapāṭha with an avagraha. This shows a great awareness of the derivational history of a larger compound, and shows that compounding is not simply a flatland concatenation of disparate items, but a step-by-step process. Whitney criticizes the formulation of this rule: “The Vāj. Pr. finds no need of such a rule as this, nor does it seem imperatively called for, all possible cases being already disposed of by rules 10 and 12 above (CA 4.1.32, 34). Still less is to be seen the necessity of adding to it the two which next follow, and which it obviously includes.” While CA (4.1.32, 34) deal with a new accretion to a previously com- pounded unit, the present rule deals with a second level combination of two independent compound-expressions, and hence has a somewhat different sub- ject matter. Secondly, the formulation of the next two rules indicates that not

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका541 all combinations were easily categorized as samāsas, and hence had to be listed separately. Not all avagr̥hyas were readily categorized as compounds. It indi- cates a historically important dimension of the term samāsa, namely that it had originally a narrower meaning, and that its scope was slowly widened in some traditions. The CA shows the transitional phase where there is still some hesitation about the exact scope of the term, and hence the need for specific rules. On the other hand, the verses cited in the CAB on CA (4.1.66) seem to take the expanded meaning of term samāsa for granted and hence lump all the examples together under a single category of pr̥thak-iṅgya-samāsa. This is not done either by the CA or by the CAB. Thus, the cited verses seem to mark a further movement of the grammatical generalization. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मिथोऽवगृह्ययोः पदयोः एकपदीभावे मध्यमेन पर्वणा अवग्रहो भवति । ‘यत् । आ॒ञ्ज॒न॒ऽ- अ॒भ्य॒ञ्ज॒नम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.६.११)। ‘प्र॒जा॒ऽअ॒मृ॒त॒त्वम् । उ॒त । दी॒र्घम् । आयुः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.३४)। ‘व्या॒न॒ऽ- उ॒दा॒नौ । वाक्’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.८.४, VVRI edn.: ११. १०.४)। ४.१.६५. समासयोश्च । Whitney (4.43). Translation: [There is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha at the joint] between two compound-expressions. Note: See the note on the rule above. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समासयोश्च । ‘अ॒घ॒शं॒स॒ऽदुः॒शं॒साभ्या॑म् । क॒रेण॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.२)। ४.१.६६. द्विरुक्ते चावगृह्ये । Whitney (4.44), D, Hac, J, M: °चावगृह्ये. Other mss read °वावगृह्ये. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction.

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 542 Translation: Also, [there is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha at the juncture between] the repeated occurrences of a separable word. Note: See the note on CA (4.1.64). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्विरुक्ते च अवगृह्ये मिथोऽवगृह्ययोः पदयोः एकपदभावे मध्यमेन पर्वणावग्रहो भवति । ‘कु॒र्व॒- तीम्ऽकु॑र्वतीम् । ए॒व’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३२)। ‘सं॒य॒तीम्ऽ- स्॑ांयतीम् । ए॒व’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३३)। ‘पि॒न्व॒तीम्ऽ- पि॑न्वतीम् । ए॒व’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३४)। ‘उ॒द्य॒तीम्ऽ- उ॑द्यतीम् । ए॒व’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३५)। ‘अ॒भि॒भव॑न्तीम्ऽ- अभिभवन्तीम् । ए॒व’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.५.३६)। ‘पृथगिङ्ग्य(H: ण्य, Whitney: ङ्ग्य)समासे च मध्ये कुर्यादवग्रहम् । संयतीं(H: ती)संयतीं(H: ती) चैव व्यानोदानौ निदर्शनम् ॥’ (source?) ४.१.६७. वसुधातरः सहस्रसातमेति वसुसहस्राभ्याम् । Whitney (4.45). P adds daṇḍas after वसुधातरः and सहस्रसातमेति. Translation: In the expressions vasudhātara and sahasra- sātama, [separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha is made] after vasu and sahasra respectively. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वसुधातरः सहस्रसातमेति वसुसहस्रा- भ्याम् अवग्रहो भवति । ‘व॒सु॒ऽधात॑रः । च॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२७.६)। ‘स॒ह॒स्रऽ॒सात॑मा । भ॒व॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२८.४)। वसुधातर इति षष्ठ्यन्तेन समासः । समासे अवग्रहो भवति। वसूनि वा दधाति । ‘व॒सु॒ऽधात॑रः’ । समासे अवग्रहो भवति।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका543 ‘साधा(H: सनि, Whitney: साधा)भ्यां च कृदन्ताभ्यां विहितौ तद्धितौ परौ । ताभ्यां षष्ठीसमासश्च पूर्वेणावग्रहः स्मृतः ॥’ (source?) Note: Whitney says: “It is not without reason that the Prātiśākhya takes note of these cases; for, since the suffixes tara and tama are separable (by iv. 16 = CA 4.1.38), and are plainly the last added members, the words they form should read, in pada, vasudhā-tara and sahasrasā-tama.” Whitney understands the commentary as offering the first alternative that the word vasudhā́taraḥ as “the plural of vasu-dhātar.” If indeed such were the case, there would be nothing exceptional about the separation of this com- pound as vasu-dhātaraḥ. Whitney responds to this interpretation: “It would be, in fact, in its Atharvan connection, much more easily interpretable in this man- ner, but that the accent speaks strongly for the other mode of derivation.” It is, however, not certain from the wording of the commentary that it is proposing a derivation from vasudhātr̥-. The commentary simply says that it is a genitive compound. However, the cited verse relates this notion of a genitive com- pound with the explanation: dhā+taraḥ, then vasūnaṃ dhā+taraḥ. The commentary gives as the second alternative, the derivation vasudhā+tara. The first part vasudhā is explained as vasūni vā dadhāti, an agentive root-noun. Whitney was not able to interpret the verse properly, since he mis- understood it as saying “after sā and dhā (?), as kr̥t -endings.” The verse says that the words sā and dhā are kr̥dantas, i.e. these words end in kr̥t-affixes, and not that they are themselves kr̥t endings. Then the taddhita affixes -tara and - tama are added after these kr̥danta formations, yielding dhātaraḥ and sātamaḥ. The words vasu and sahasra are then compounded with these in genitive Tat- puruṣas. The tradition thus looks at the words dhā and sā as agentive root- nouns, with zero-affixes such as VIC or VIṬ, which turn a root into an agen- tive noun. For the Pāṇinian derivation of sā in sahasrasā́tamā, see: षणु दाने । ‘जन- सनखनक्रमगमो विट्’ (पा.३.२.६७) । ‘विड्वनोरनुनासिकस्यात्’ (पा.६.४.४) इति आत्वम् । ततः आतिशायनिकस्तमप् ।, Sāyaṇa on AV (3.28.4). For example, the word viśvapā is explained as: विश्वं पाति रक्षतीति विग्रहे ‘पा रक्षणे’ इत्यस्मात् ‘आतोनुपसर्गे …’ (पा.३.२.३) इति कं बाधित्वा ‘आतो मनिन्क्वनिब्व- निपश्च’ (पा.३.२.७४) इति चकाराद्विजिति व्याख्यातारः । इह छन्दसि ‘आतो मनिन् …’

अध्याय ४, पाद १ 544 इति विच्, लोके तु ‘अन्येभ्योपि दृश्यते’ (पा.३.२.१७४) इत्यनेनेति विवेकः, Tattva- bodhinī on SK on P.6.3.110, p. 56. The traditional explanation for vasudhā would be similar. For AV (3.28.4), Whitney records a different accent for the word स॒हस्र॑- सातमा. This variant is noted by the VVRI edition, but I have followed the reading as recorded by the VVRI edition. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 135) says: “All the manuscripts agree in giving the false accent sahásrasātamā in b; it should be sahasra-sā́tamā — or to rectify the meter, simply -sā́.” The VVRI edition, without specifying the reason, seems to have followed Whitney’s sug- gested change in giving the reading sahasrasā́tamā, though it notes the original manuscript reading (= mūlakośa) sahásra-sātamā as a variant. ४.१.६८. सुभिषक्तमस्तमे । Whitney (4.46). E, F, I, O: °क्तमे. Translation: [In the expression] subhiṣaktama, [there is separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] before [the affix] -tama. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सुभिषक्तम इति तमे परतः अवग्रहो भवति । ‘सुभि॑षक्ऽतमाः’(पद, अ.वे. ६.२४.२)। शोभनः भिषक् । सुभिषक् । ‘भिषजा हि सुशब्दोऽयं पुंलिङ्गेन समस्यते । उपजातस्तमस्तस्मात्पूर्वेणावग्रह[ः] स्मृतः ॥’ (source?) Note: Whitney translates the cited verse as: “here su is compounded with the masculine bhiṣaj, and tama is farther appended : separation by ava- graha is made of the latter.” Whitney criticizes the formulation of this rule: “I can see no reason at all for any such rule as this : the case specified is simply one in which the sepa- ration by avagraha takes place normally, according to the general rules, and a score more of precisely similar cases might easily be quoted from the Atharvan text: instances are bhágavat-tama (ii.9.2) and bhágavat-tara (iv.13.6), sphātimat- tama (iii.24.6), mr̥támanaḥ-tara (vi.18.2), and vr̥trahán-tama (vii.110.1).”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका545 Whitney’s criticism is not justified in view of the fact that the expres- sion bhiṣák-tarāḥ, without the initial su, is attested in AV (19.2.3), leading one to think of the possibility of first having the expression bhiṣak-tama and then compounding it with su. In such a case, the juncture of su with bhiṣaktama being the most recent juncture, the avagraha would fall between su and bhiṣaktama. Such an understanding of this compound is further strengthened by the fact that the expression bhiṣáktamam without su also appears in bhiṣáktamaṃ tvā bhiṣájāṃ śr̥ṇomi (RV 2.33.4), which is comparable to bhiṣájāṃ súbhiṣak- tamāḥ (AV 6In contrast with this, the expression subhiṣaj by itself is not attested in the Vedic Saṃhitās. The CA rule is most likely based on such an understanding of the com- pound, and then stating the exceptional behavior of the avagraha. On the other hand, the cited verse normalizes the avagraha by suggesting that su is com- pounded with bhiṣak, and that tama is added to subhiṣak. On such an under- standing of the derivation, the avagraha becomes normal, and does not require a special rule. इति चतुर्थाध्याये प्रथमः पादः । H: ॥४७॥ चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ चतुरध्यायीभाष्ये चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः समाप्तः. E, F: चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः. A, B, C, D, J, M, P: प्रथमः पादः. I: ॥९८॥ इति चतुर्थाध्याये प्रथमः पादः. O: इत्य. चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ ९९ ॥. Notice the difference between the number of rules for this Pāda given by H (47), I (98), and O (99). This is an indication of two textual traditions, one with the initial verses, and the one without. However, the majority of the manuscripts supports inclusion of these verses in the text of the CA. One may conjecture that the inclusion of the verses was explicitly done first by the manuscripts of the Kautsavyākaraṇa, as evidenced by the number of rules recorded in I and O. However, the verses are physically present in all the manuscripts, even though not counted in the number of rules, cf. H (47). Thus, they must have been pre- sent in the archetype reconstructible on the basis of the existing manuscripts. However, given the abnormal length of this Pāda, it seems unlikely that the ini- tial portion was part of the ‘original’ CA. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥४७॥ चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः ॥ चतुराध्यायीभाष्ये चतुर्थस्य प्रथमः पादः समाप्तः ॥ _________________________________

॥ चतुर्थोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ द्वितीयः पादः ॥ ४.२.१. न तकारसकाराभ्यां मत्वर्थे । Whitney (4.47). B, D: °मन्वर्थे. J, M, P(orig): नकारसकाराभ्यां°. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: After [words ending in] t and s, there is no [separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] before [an affix] in the sense of [the affix] matU [i.e. a possessive affix]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न तकारसकाराभ्यां मत्वर्थे अवग्रहो भवति । ‘द॒त्वती॑’(H adds: म्) (पद, अ.वे. ४.३.२)। ‘ग॒रुत्मा॑न्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.६.३)। ‘म॒रुत्वा॑न्’(पद, H: त्) (अ.वे. ६.१०४.३)। ‘ऊर्जस्वान्’ (ऊर्ज॑स्वन्तः, पद, अ.वे. ७.६०.२)। ‘पय॑स्वान्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.७३.५)। ‘ऊर्ज॑स्वती’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१२.२)। ‘पय॑स्वती’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१०. १)। Note: While the commentary does not provide counter-examples, Whitney provides them: āsan-vat (AV vi.12.2), asthan-vantam (AV ix.9.4), and brahmaṇ-vatīm (AV vi.108.2). These expressions are split with an ava- graha in the Padapāṭha. Whitney points out: “The only consonants other than t and s which are found to occur before the suffix vant are n and ṇ, which allow separation. … The rule is an exception under rule 17 (= CA 4.1.39) above.” It is also an exception to CA (4.1.40). The expression matvartha implies that matU was looked as a proto- typical possessive affix. Indeed, the possessive affix vat is derived by Pāṇini by changing the m of matUP, cf. P.8.2.9 (मादुपधायाश्च मतोर्वोऽयवादिभ्यः).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका547 ४.२.२. यत्तदेतेभ्यो वतौ । Whitney (4.48). Ha: °मतौ. Hc, J, M, P: °वंतौ. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: After yat, tat, and etat, [there is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha], before vatU. Note: While prohibiting the separation of vat, the rule informs us that forms like yāvat are derived by adding the affix vat to yat etc., cf. P.5.2.39 (यत्तदेतेभ्यः परिमाणे वतुप्). This rule is an exception to CA (4.1.40). Pāṇini 6.3.91 (आ सर्वनाम्नः) prescribes the replacement of the final sound of a pronoun with ā before the affixes dr̥k, dr̥ś, and vatU, e.g. yad+vat > ya+ā+vat > yāvat. However, there were other grammarians who prescribed the affix ḌāvatU, which led to the deletion of the final portion of the pronoun beginning with the final vowel, yad+ḌāvatU > y+ḌāvatU > y+āvat > yāvat, cf. Vārttika : डावतावर्थवैशेष्यात् …, on P.5.2.39. Referring to this Vārttika, the Tattvabodhinī points out: इह शास्त्रे वतुपं विधाय तस्मिन् परे आत्वं विहितम् । पूर्वाचार्यास्तु डावतुं विदधिरे, on SK on P.5.2.39, p. 298. The CA procedure is more like that of Pāṇini. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यत् तत् एतत् इत्येतेभ्यः वतौ तत्र च न अवग्रहो भवति । यत् । ‘याव॑त् । ते॒ । अ॒भि । वि॒ऽपश्या॑मि’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१.३३)। य(H: ाव)त् । त(H: ाव)त् । ‘ताव॑त् । स॒म्ऽऐतु॑। इ॒न्द्रि॒यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२२.५)। एतत् । ‘ए॒ताव॑त् । अ॒स्य॒। प्रा॒चीन॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.११.८)। यत्तदेतेभ्य इति किमर्थम् । ‘सनृता॑ऽवत्’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२०.६)। ‘अ॒पा॒ष्ठऽव॑त्’ (H: अपाऽष्टवत्) (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.२९)। Note: The reason for prohibition here seems to be sandeha ‘doubt’ as to the exact shape of the base, after which the separation is to take effect, cf. CA 4.2.5 (षोडशी सन्देहात्) below. Referring to the counter-examples cited by the CAB, Whitney remarks that these are “hardly called for.” I assume Whitney means that the rule is so obvious, there is no need for counter-examples, and not that there is anything

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 548 wrong with these counter-examples. The avagraha in the counter-examples is effected by CA 4.1.40 (वकारादौ च). The present rule is an exception to that rule. ४.२.३. देवताद्वन्द्वे च । Whitney (4.49). Translation: Also, [no separation of members with an ava- graha takes place] in a copulative compound of divinity-names. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - देवतानां द्वन्द्वो देवताद्वन्द्वः । तत्र चावग्रहो न भवति । ‘इ॒न्द्रा॒ग्नी’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३५.४)। ‘इ॒न्द्र॒वा॒यू’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२०.६)। ‘भ॒वा॒रु॒द्रौ’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.२.१४)। ‘भवा॑शर्वौ’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२८.१)। ‘वा॒ता॒प॒र्ज॒न्या’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.४.१६)। ‘अ॒ग्नीषोमा॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.८.२)। ‘मि॒त्रावरु॑णा’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.४.४)। ‘इन्द्रा॑वरुणा’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.५८.१)। ‘इन्द्रा॑सोमा’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.४.१)। ‘देवतानामिह द्वन्द्वे दीर्घत्वं य(Whitney adds: दि?) दृश्यते । अनिङ्ग्यं तत् (H: अनित्यत्, W: अनिङ्ग्यं तत्) पदं वाच्यम् अग्नीषोमौ (अ.वे. १.८.२) नि(H: ति)दर्श[नम्] ॥ देवासुराणां द्वन्द्वेऽ- प्यवगृह्यं कथं पदम् । शाकल्यस्येङ्गिते नित्यं यथा ‘स॒त्या॒(H: संख्या, W: सत्या)नृते’ (अ.वे. १.३३.२) तथा ॥ ब्रह्मप्रजापतिः (अ.वे. १९.९.१२) त्वह(त्विह?) नावगृह्यं कदाचन ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका549 आनङः प्रतिषेधश्च वायोश्चोभयतः परम् ॥ इन्द्रवाय्वादिषु (अ.वे. ३.२०.६) कथं दीर्घो यत्र न(H: त, W: न) दृश्यते । द्वन्द्वमात्रे नि(H: न)षेधस्त्वम्(?) अहोरात्रे निदर्शनम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Referring to the cited verses, Whitney says: “A number of verses follow in the commentary, in the usual corrupt condition of the text : devatānām iha dvandve dīrghatvaṃ yati dr̥śyate : aniṅgyaṃ tat padaṃ vācyam agnīṣomau nidarśanam : thus much is clear, and is a virtual repetition of our rule, but with a restriction to cases in which a long vowel appears at the end of the first member of the compound, which requires a specification farther on of the single exception indravāyū; what follows is more obscure, and I have not been able, with what time I have given to it, to restore the text to an intelligible form.” I think we can now make better sense of most, if not all, of these verses. The second verse says that, if, as stated in the first verse, a deva- tādvandva that has a long vowel is not divisible, then how come the compound devāsurā́ḥ (AV 6.141.3) is divisible in the Padapāṭha as deva-asurā́ḥ? Here, the long vowel is due to the merger of the two words, and not due to lengthening of the final vowel of deva. This is similar to the compound satyānr̥té (AV 1.33.2), which is divisible in the Padapāṭha as satya-anr̥té. On the face of it, the line discussing the expression bráhma prajā́patiḥ (AV 19.9.12) is unclear. It seems to say that this is never separated. How- ever, the available Padapāṭha reads: bráhma / prajā́-patiḥ. However, note that Kātyāyana in his Vārttika : ब्रह्मप्रजापत्यादीनां च on P.6.3.25 (आनङ् ऋतो द्वन्द्वे) says that in the dvandva compound brahmaprajāpatī, one does not have ānAṄ for the final vowel of the first member. Thus expression आनङः प्रतिषेधः च in our verses is not difficult to comprehend. The present verse seems to say that in a compound like brahmaprajāpatī, there is no separation. The dvandva com- pound brahmaprajāpatī́ is not attested in AV. It is, however, attested in the Taittirīya-Āraṇyaka (4.1.1). The line वायोश्चोभयतः परम् is comparable to Kātyāyana’s Vt. देवताद्वन्द्वे उभयत्र वायोः प्रतिषेधः on P.6.3.26 (देवताद्वन्द्वे च), which says that neither is the word vāyu as a first member of a devatādvandva lengthened, nor is another word, before vāyu is lengthened, e.g. vāyvagnī, agnivāyū. The AV example of

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 550 this phenomenon is indravāyū́ (AV 3.20.6) which is not divided in the Padapāṭha, even though there is no lengthening. The last verse is somewhat unclear. It seems to be saying that this pro- hibition of avagraha should apply to all dvandvas, and an example of this would be ahorātre (AV 6.128.3). See CA (4.2.6) below. In view of the fact that CA (4.2.4) below specifically relates to those dvandvas where the first member has its final vowel lengthened, the proper examples for the present rule can only be compounds like indravāyū́ (AV 3.20. 6), where we do not have lengthening of the final vowel of the first member. ४.२.४. यस्य चोत्तरपदे दीर्घो व्यञ्जनादौ । Whitney (4.50). Translation: [There is no separation of members of a dvan- dva compound with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] where [the final vowel of the first member is] lengthened, before the consonant-initial second member. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यस्य द्वन्द्वस्य उत्तरपदे दीर्घो व्यञ्जनादौ तत्र चानवग्रहो भवति । ‘इ॒ष्टा॒पू॒र्तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१२. ४)। ‘पि॒तापु॒त्रौ’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.११२.२)। ‘ह॒सा॒मु॒दौ’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.२.४३)। ‘द्यावा॑पृथि॒वी’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१. ४)। ‘द्यावा॑भूमी’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.३१)। ‘उ॒षासा॒नक्ता॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१२.६)। व्यञ्जनादावि(H: मि)ति किमर्थम्। ‘स॒त्या॒नृ॒ते इति॑ स॒त्य॒ऽअ॒नृ॒ते’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३३.२)। ‘इडा(W: रा?)मीवापुरोभ्यश्च प्रकृत्या दीर्घ एव सः । ह्रस्वस्य यत्र दीर्घत्वं स द्वन्द्वो नावगृह्यते ॥’ (source?) Note: Examples cited by the CAB on this rule are found listed under APR (217, pp. 136-7) in the same order. This rule and the commentary on this rule answer some of the ques- tions raised in the verses cited in the commentary on the previous rule. The condition vyañjanādau excludes the compound satyānr̥té from being indivisi- ble. Here, the second member, i.e. anr̥ta begins in a vowel, and the lengthening

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका551 in satyā- comes about through euphonic combination -a+a-, rather than as lengthening of the final vowel of the first member, before the second member. The verses cited in the commentary on the previous rule also bring up the ex- ample devāsurā́ḥ (AV 6.141.3). As far as the verse cited in the commentary on this rule, Whitney has justifiable criticisms. He renders the verse as: “After irā, amīvā, and puraḥ [avagraha comes in], for in those cases the vowel is long by nature; but where a short vowel is lengthened, there no division by avagraha takes place.” Then, he remarks: “This is a very blundering statement, so far as concerns the in- stances given in the first pāda: puraḥ, of course, could form no copulative compound; amīva forms none such in the Atharvan, and it also, though a femi- nine with a long final vowel, as a separate word, always shortens its final in composition (amīva-cātana, e.g. i.28.1; amīva-han, e.g. RV. i.18.2); irā, too, is found only in the compound irā-kṣīrā (x.10.6), which is not copulative.” Of the three words cited by the verse, for amīvā, there is a plausible ex- ample from the Paippalāda AV (1.10.1): amīvāyātucātanam. A variant for this is cited as amīvāyās tu cātanam. However, if we accept the reading amīvā+yātu+cātanam, then the first portion, i.e. amīvā+yātu could be a kind of dvandva referred to by the verse. This reading is rejected by Vishvabandhu, in favor of amīvāyās tu cātanam, cf. VVRI Vedic Word Concordance, Saṃhitā Section, Pt.I., p.385, footnote e. However, considering the reference to yātu in the same hymn, PAV (1.10.3), there is some reason to support the reading amīvā+yātu+cātanam. For iḍā in the verse, one could possibly point to the compound iḍā+prāśitrá (ŚB, 2.6.1.33). ४.२.५. षोडशी संदेहात् । Whitney (4.51). Translation: [Members of the word] ṣoḍaśin [are not sepa- rated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha], due to [con-]fusion. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - षोडशी सन्देहात् । न अवग्रहो भव- ति। ‘इ॒ष्टा॒पू॒र्तस्य॑ । षो॒ड॒शम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२९.१)। ‘षो॒ड॒शी । स॒प्त॒ऽरा॒त्रः’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.७.११, VVRI edn.: ११.९.११)।

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 552 Note: Whitney has some important comments on this rule. We agree with his opinion “that the rule reads ṣoḍaśī in stead of ṣoḍaśa is surprising, since both words (each in but a single passage) occur in the text.” On the statement of the rule that the word ṣoḍaśī is not split because of sandeha, which Whitney translates as ‘interfusion,’ he comments: “Or, it may be, ‘on account of doubt’- that is to say, of doubt as to the form to which the constituents should be restored, their mode of combination being an entirely anomalous one. It is to be observed, however, that our treatise has itself (at i.63 = CA 1.3.1) given special directions as to how ṣaṭ and the following daśa are com- bined together, so that to the student of the Prātiśākhya the pada-reading śaṭ- daśa ought to occasion no difficulty.” Whitney has pointed his finger at a very important dilemma. In stead of saying that there is behavioral contradiction, however, one may understand the situation somewhat differently. It is difficult to say that the rules given in this or any other Prātiśākhya were actually the ones followed by the creators of the Padapāṭhas. The Prātiśākhyas, on the other hand, seem to take the existence of the Padapāṭha for granted, and then try to account for it. This being the case, the author of the Prātiśākhya was ob- ligated to observe that the word ṣoḍaśī was not divided in the Padapāṭha, and the expression sandehāt refers to his own rationalization as to why the Pada- pāṭha did not divide this word. On the other hand, the rule CA 1.3.1 is almost a rule of word-derivation, showing the leanings of the author of the Prāti- śākhya in the direction of general grammatical theory. Whitney himself has given ample proof of such leanings on the part of this text, which go well beyond the narrow scope of a Prātiśākhya. The notion of sandeha as a cause for non-separation is also found in APR (217a, p. 134): सन्देहाद्वर्णलोपाच्च व्यत्ययान्नावगृह्यते. The examples of this rule are also found in APR (p.137). Also cf. VPR (5.34: पाङ्त्रानुद्द्रोऽब्भ्राय संशयात्) and (5.38: उत्तम्भनादीन्यादिसंशयात्). ४.२.६. अहोरात्रे । Whitney (4.52). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [There is no separation of members with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha in the word] ahorātra.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका553 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अहोरात्रे इति च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘अ॒हो॒रा॒त्राभ्या॑म् । नक्ष॑त्रेभ्यः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१२८.३)। ‘अ॒हो॒रा॒त्रे [इति॑]। इ॒दम् । ब्रू॒मः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.६.५)। Note: Whitney says: “There is nothing in the character of either ahorātre or ṣoḍaśa, so far as I can discover, which should withdraw them from the action of rule 50 (= CA 4.2.4), and render their separate mention neces- sary.” I feel that Whitney is overlooking here the reason sandehāt given by the author of the Prātiśākhya in CA 4.2.5, which most likely continues into this rule. As I see, these are irregular changes. The change of ṣaṭ + daśa to ṣoḍaśa is irregular by all counts. Similarly, the behavior of the first member in the compound ahorātre is equally irregular, and hence the confusion. The stem form is ahan, which changes to ahar, and, especially in this compound, behaves like ahas. Thus, these cases are indeed more complicated than the cases listed under CA 4.2.4, where we have nothing more than simple lengthening of the final vowel of the first member of the compound. We should note another curious fact. While the APR (217, p. 137) lists ahorātré among its examples of indivisible words, it does not list ahorātrā́- bhyāṃ. On the other hand, it lists both ṣoḍaśam and ṣoḍaśī. This makes one wonder whether the expression ahorātrā́bhyām was intended as an indivisible word. However, no editions record any variants. ४.२.७. अञ्चतिजरत्पर्वसु । Whitney (4.53), C, Hcb: °पर्वसु. Others: पूर्वसु. A, B: अवति°. P: °एतत्पू- र्वसु. Translation: [There is no separation in the Padapāṭha with an avagraha] for the root añc, as well as for older junctures [i.e. junctures of older constituents of a compound-expression]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अञ्चतौ च जरत्पर्वसु च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प्राचीः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.२८.११)। ‘प्र॒तीची॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.२७.३)। ‘उदी॑चीः’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१. ३१)। ‘शंता॑तिऽभिः । [अथो॒ इति॑] । अ॒रि॒ष्टता॑तिऽभिः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१३.५)।

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 554 ‘यत्रोभे प्रतिवि[षि?]ध्येते उपजातं जरच्च(H: जरं च) यत् । जरतावग्रहः कार्य ऋक्सामाभ्यां निदर्शनम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Consider Whitney’s criticism of the commentary: “The com- mentator ends with a verse which seems to say precisely the opposite of the rule of his text. … ‘when both members are severally separable, both the newly added and the ancient, separation by avagraha is to be made of the ancient one: an instance is r̥k-sāmābhyām.’ But this is mere non-sense, as it stands, the word cited being a case where the last-appended element is inseparable, as following a long vowel (see rule 33 = CA 4.1.55, above), and where, there- fore, the division be suffered to remain between the two original constituents of the compound. If the theme of the declension had been r̥k-sāman, instead of r̥ksāma, we should have an instrumental dual r̥ksāma-bhyām, which would be a true illustration of the rule. One may conjecture that the last line originally read jare nāvagrahaḥ kārya r̥ksāmabhyāṃ nidarśanam, and that it was amended to its present form by some copyist who knew that the Atharvan read, not r̥ksāma-bhyām, but r̥k-sāmābhyām, but who was careless enough to overlook the discordance which he thus introduced between the text and its comment.” I do agree with Whitney that there is discord between the rule and the verse as it stands. However, Whitney’s emendation of the verse and his attrib- uting to the copyist so much of the initiative do not seem appropriate. Perhaps, we do not fully understand the meaning of the expression pratividhye te or pratividhyete in the cited verse. In my view, it is most likely that this is a mis- take for an original pratiṣidhyete. Assuming this to be the reading, the verse would mean: “Where the separation is prohibited for both the old and the new members, the separation should be carried out with the old member, for exam- ple in r̥k-sāmābhyām.” Here, the avagraha is prohibited before -bhyām, be- cause it is preceded by a long vowel, and it is prohibited between r̥k and sāmābhyām, because it is an old joint. In such a case, the verse says that the avagraha should be done between the old-members. Such an understanding removes the dilemma posed by this verse for Whitney. The first three examples quoted on this rule by the CAB to illustrate the formations with the root añc are found listed under APR (217, p. 136).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका555 ४.२.८. समुद्रादिषु च । Whitney (4.54). C: omits च. Translation: [No separation of members with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha occurs] in the words such as samudra. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - समुद्रादिषु च …(missing commen- tary)। Note: The missing commentary is clearly due to the carelessness of the copyist. However, Whitney unjustly criticizes the commentator: “This, however, gives us reason to believe that the commentator had performed his work in his usual brief and unsatisfactory style, and had done very little toward filling up the gaṇa.” I do not see how the copyist’s carelessness can give rea- son to believe such a thing. Invaluable help is offered by the fact that the samudrādigaṇa is fully listed in the APR (217c, examples 59ff.). This is a list of words whose seem- ing parts should not be separated in the Padapāṭha. Given the close relation- ship between the CAB and the APR, there is every reason to believe that the commentator would have cited the first few words from the APR list. For a possible reference to the samudrādigaṇa in the CAB, see CA (4.1.38). We must, however, keep in mind that the membership of the sa- mudrādigaṇa as intended by the CA must have been somewhat smaller as compared to the list found in the APR, because a large number of cases of in- divisible expressions listed by the APR in the samudrādigaṇa are taken care of by the CA with specific rules, cf. CA (4.2.1-7). Since Whitney had no access to the APR edited by Surya Kanta, he made a determined effort on his own to fill out this gaṇa. However, now we have a historically more authentic collection in the APR and we need not dwell upon Whitney’s collection, except as a reflection of what one finds in the manuscripts of the AV. ४.२.९. वृद्धेनैकाक्षरेण स्वरान्तेन । Whitney (4.55). Hb: वृद्धौ°. D: वृत्तेनै°. O: वृद्धै°. P adds a daṇḍa as a correction after वृद्धेनैकाक्षरेण.

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 556 Translation: A monosyllabic word, ending in a vr̥ddhi vowel [i.e. ā, ai, and au, is not separated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वृद्धेन एकाक्षरेण स्वरान्तेन अवग्रहो [न?] भवति । ‘सा॒प॒त्नः’ (पद, अ.वे. २.७.२)। ‘सौ॒म॒न॒सः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.३०.७)। ‘सौ॒म॒न॒स(H: स्य)म्’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.१.१९)। ‘साै॒ध॒न्व॒नाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.४७.३)। ‘त्रैष्टु॑- भम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.१०.१)। ‘सौभ॑गम्’ (पद, अ.वे. २. ३६.१)। ‘सौभा॑ग्यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.४२)। वृद्धेनेति किमर्थम् । ‘सु॒ऽप॒र्णः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२४.१)। एकाक्षरे- णेति किमर्थम् । ‘एे॒रा॒ऽव॒तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.१०.२९, VVRI edn.: ८.१४.१५)। ‘मार्त॑ऽवत्सम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६. २६)। ‘वाधू॑ऽयम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.२९)। स्वरान्तेनेति किमर्थम् । ‘नैः॒ऽबा॒ध्ये॑न (H: नौबाऽध्येन) । ह॒विषा॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.७५.१)। ‘दौःऽस्व॑प्न्यम् । दौःऽजी॑वित्यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१७.५)। ‘अवगृह्यात्पदाद्यं तु (W: पदाद् यं तु) तद्धितो वृद्धिमान्भवेत् । एकात् वृद्धिस्वरान्तेषु(H: सु) न चैवावग्रहो भवेत् ॥ ऐरावतो मा(H: म)र्तवत्सं वाधूयं च निदर्शनात् ।’ (source?) Note: The CA uses the term vr̥ddha without defining it. Pāṇini de- fines this term as P.1.1.73 (वृद्धिर्यस्याचामादिस्तद्वृद्धम्). Something similar is in- tended by the CA. Referring to the example airā-vatáḥ (AV 8.10.29), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 515) says: “Āirā-vatáḥ is quoted under Prāt. iv.55 (= CA 4.2.9) as an example of a word divided in the pada-text, not withstanding its secondary formation with initial vr̥ddhi.” All the positive examples of the CAB are found under APR (219, pp. 165-6). We should note that the APR (219) attributes this view to Śākalya:

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका557 समस्तमेकाक्षरं वृद्ध्या यद्भवेद्विकृतम् पदम् ॥ स्वरान्तं नावगृह्णीयाच्छाकल्यस्य तथा मतम् ॥ ४.२.१०. अवर्णान्तेनैकाक्षरेण प्रतिषिद्धेनाप्रयावादिवर्जम् । Whitney (4.56). B, D, J, M, P: Daṇḍa after °क्षरेण. A: only प्रतिषिद्धेना- प्रयावादिवर्जम्. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] for a monosyllabic item ending in a, which is also negatived [with an initial a or an], except in expressions like aprayāvan. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अवर्णान्तेन एकाक्षरेण प्रतिषिद्धेन नावग्रहो भवति । ‘अस॑(H: सं)बन्धुः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१५. २)। ‘अस॑पत्नः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१९.४)। ‘अप्रजाः अप्रजा- ताः’ (not in known Vedic texts)। अवर्णान्तेनेति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒ग्ने॒ । अ॒क्र॒व्य॒ऽअ॒त्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.३)। प्रतिषिद्धेनेति किमर्थम् । ‘यः । स॒ऽप(H: य)त्नः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१९.४)। प्रयावादिवर्जमिति किमर्थम् । ‘अप्र॑ऽयावन्’ (पद, अ.वे. ३. ५.१)। ‘अप्र॑ऽमादम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१.७)। ‘अप्र॑ऽहितौ’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.२९.२)। ‘अप्र॑ऽचङ्कशाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६. १६)। ‘एकाक्षरसवर्णान्तं यद् भवेत् पदमुत्तरम् । तत्पदं नाव(H: प)गृह्णीयादप्रयावादिवर्जितम् ॥’ (source?) Note: Whitney criticizes the formulation of this rule as follows: “The form of statement which our treatise has adopted for its rule respecting the separability of negative compounds is not particularly well chosen.” However, compare the CA rule to APR (220, p.166): एकाक्षरमवर्णान्तं यद्भवेन्नञ उत्तरम् । तत्पदं नावगृह्णीयादप्रयावादिवर्जितम् ॥

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 558 The verse cited by the CAB is clearly a mutilated version of APR (220). The APR (220) itself, in Surya Kanta’s edition reads b: यद्भवेन्नय उत्तरम्, which I have emended to यद्भवेन्नञ उत्तरम्. We should also note that all the posi- tive examples of this rule offered by the CAB including the unattested aprajātāḥ are the first few examples of a long list of examples offered by the APR. The APR (p. 167) also illustrates the condition aprayāvādivarjitam with the exam- ples ápra-yāvam (AV 3.5.1) and ápra-yucchan (AV 2.6.3). Whitney also draws our attention to the form ápra-yucchan. Regarding the indivisible example ásabandhuḥ (AV 6.15.2), Whitney points out that this word in its occurrence in AV (6.54.3) is divided by his Padapāṭha manuscript as ása-bandhuḥ. Whitney says that this is “probably a copyist’s error.” The VVRI edition does not even note such a manuscript vari- ant. Concerning the form aprayāvan in AV (3.5.1), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol. I., p. 91) says: “Áprayāvan in d, which is read by all the mss. (hence by both editions) and the comm. (= Sāyaṇa), is unquestionably to be emended to - yāvam; the word is quoted in the Prāt. text (iv.56 = CA 4.2.10), but not in a way o determine its form (aprayāvādi-). … The commentary raises no objection to áprayāvan, and explains it as either māṃ vihāyā ’napagantā san (with irregular exchange of case-forms), or else aprayātar, i.e. sarvadā dhāryamāṇa.” The manuscript H for the CAB clearly reads aprayāvan, and, in his CA edition, Whitney also reads aprayāvan. For Lanman’s vigorous defense of Whitney’s emendation to the form áprayāvam, see: AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 991. Whitney’s emendation to aprayāvam is now supported by the APR (p. 167). ४.२.११. प्राणति प्राणन्ति । Whitney (4.57). A, B, D: first word प्रणति. A, B: second word प्राणति. Translation: [There is no separation of components with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] in [the forms] prāṇati and prāṇanti. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्राणति प्राणन्तीति न अवग्रहो भवति। ‘यः । प्रा॒णति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३०.४)। ‘यत् । च॒ । प्रा॒णति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.४.१०, VVRI edn.: ११.६.१०)। ‘येन॑ । प्रा॒णन्ति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३२.१)। ‘यस्मा॑त् । प्रा॒णन्ति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.३.३)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका559 Note: Whitney observes: “But the rule is an exceedingly insufficient exposition of the treatment by the pada-text of the forms of the root an with the prefix pra. Division is, in fact, omitted only when the verb, and not the prepo- sition, has the accent; but then not in the two forms specified only, but also in the participles - as prāṇát (e.g. x.8.2), prāṇaté (xi.4.8), prāṇatás (iv.2.2), prāṇatā́m (iii.31.9), and prāṇatī́nām (viii.9.9) – and in the causative as prāṇáyati (xiii.3.3). On the other hand, if the prefix takes the accent, it is disjoined from the verb, according to the general usage in such cases, and we read prá : ana (iii.31.9), and prá : anati (x.8.19, xi.4.14). If the root is compounded with apa, also, the same usage is followed, and we have apānaté (xi.4.8) and ápa : anati (xi.4.14).” The APR (pp. 135-6) takes care of Whitney’s concerns by provid- ing a much fuller list of finite verb forms and participial forms where the divi- sion does not take place, and is, on the whole, a more adequate accounting of the facts of the Atharvan. One way to soften Whitney’s criticism is to say that the CA rule applies only to those cases, where prá is compounded with the root an, and not where it remains apart as an independent word, due to the retaining of its udātta accent. In any case, either the rule should have been more specific, or there should have been a more adequate listing, as in the APR (pp. 135-6). It should be noted that the AV form is prāṇati, while the corresponding RV form is prāṇiti. That is also the form found in the Taittirīya-Brāhmaṇa (3.12.6.1). This justifies the wording of the rule: अनतौ विसंभ्यां प्राणाख्या चेत्, CA (4.1.61). For a parallel, see under APR (217a, p. 135): प्राणोऽपानति वेदितः प्रापाभ्यां दीर्घसंशयात्. Compare the explanation saṃśayāt here with sandehāt in CA (4.2.5: षोडशी सन्देहात्). ४.२.१२. संपरिभ्यां सकारादौ करोतौ । Whitney (4.58). O: करौति for करोतौ. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha], after [the preverbs] sam and pari, before s-initial forms of kr̥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सम् परीत्येताभ्यां सकारादौ करोतौ अवग्रहो न भवति । ‘सं॒स्कृ॒त॒(H: तं)त्रम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४. २१.४)। ‘सं॒स्कृ॒तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१.३५)। ‘परि॑ष्कृता’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.३.१०)।

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 560 Note: The VVRI edition notes the manuscript variant सं॒स्कृ॒त॒ऽत्रम्, and notes that this is supported by the R̥gveda Padapāṭha. This may also be a case of the influence of the R̥gvedic tradition on the AV tradition. Whitney’s Index Verborum gives the RV form, which Whitney later admitted was a case of oversight (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 187). The examples quoted by the CAB are found in the same order in APR ( p. 145). ४.२.१३. सर्वस्मिन्नेवागमसकारादौ तुविष्टमवर्जम् । Whitney (4.59). C, F: °न्नेवासकारादौ°. F: तुविष्टमवर्जं as a separate rule. O: सर्वास्मित्रेवागमसकारादौ°. Translation: [No separation with an avagraha in the Pada- pāṭha is made] in any case where there is an inserted s, except in the form tuviṣṭama (AV 6.33.3). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सर्वस्मिन्नेवागमसकारादौ न अवग्रहो भवति । तुविष्टमवर्जम् । ‘अ॒त॒स्क॒रम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१. ४७)। ‘तस्क॑रः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३.२)। ‘वन॒स्पतिः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३.१)। ‘बृह॒स्पतिः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१३.२)। तुवि- ष्टमवर्जमिति किमर्थम् । ‘इन्द्रः॒ पति॑स्तु॒विष्ट॑मः’ (पद ! ‘तु॒विऽत॑मः,’ अ.वे. ६.३३.३)। Note: Referring to the examples cited by the CAB, Whitney says: “Their citation under such a precept implies the acceptance of some such ety- mological theories of their derivation and form as given by the Vāj. Pr. (iii.49, 51), which explains taskara and br̥haspati as from tat-kara and br̥hat-pati re- spectively, with loss of t and insertion of s, and vanaspati as from vana-pati, with the insertion of s; but it is unnecessary to remark that such explanations are futile : taskara is obscure, and the other two are without much doubt com- pounds of pati with the preceding genitive of an obsolete noun, being analo- gous with bráhmaṇas páti, vācás páti, śubhás páti, etc.; and they would doubt- less be separated by the pada-text into two independent words, like these, but for their frequency of occurrence, and, yet more, the irregularity of the accent of their former members as genitives of a monosyllabic theme.” We may additionally note that Pāṇini derives these forms in an analo- gous way, cf. P.6.1.157 (पारस्करप्रभृतीनि च संज्ञायाम्), and the gaṇasūtra : तद्बृहतोः

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका561 करपत्योश्चोरदेवतयोः सुट् तलोपश्च. Instead of castigating the Indian grammarians for not recognizing the ‘obsolete’ genitives, one may recognize that their pro- cedure of viewing these as s-insertions, marks a similar fact, namely that these are not synchronically to be treated as genitives. The Padapāṭha, the Prāti- śākhyas, and Pāṇini, all treat the classical language as the norm, and the Vedic language as a deviation from that norm, and hence there is great deal to be learned from their works about the synchronic perception of language. The Padapāṭha for RV (1.186.6) reads तु॒विःऽत॑मः, in contrast with the AV Padapāṭha reading तु॒विऽत॑मः, suggesting that that tradition did not view the s in the form tuviṣṭamaḥ as an āgama, but that it was simply a normal transfor- mation of the visarga. The CA rule and the AV Padapāṭha imply a different intended derivation for the same word. Also see CA (3.4.28) which deals with the same form. The examples offered by the CAB on the present rule occur in the same order in the APR (p. 145). ४.२.१४. विश्पतिर्विश्पत्नी । Whitney (4.60). Translation: [There is no separation of the components with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] in [the expressions] viśpátiḥ and viśpátnī. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - विश्पतिर्विश्पत्नी न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘स्वप्तु॑ । वि॒श्पतिः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.५.६)। ‘या । वि॒श्पत्नी॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.४६.३, VVRI edn.: ७.४८.३)। ‘विश्पतिर्विश्पत्नी यस्य पतिर्विश्वस्य विश्पतिः । व(H: च)शब्दो(H: ब्दौ) लुप्यते पत्यौ विशां वा पतिर्विश्पतिः ॥’ (source?) Note: These two examples are listed in APR (p. 145). The verse cited by the commentary offers two different derivations for viśpáti, namely viśvasya patiḥ or viśām patiḥ. Whitney remarks: “The indivisibility of the compound is doubtless owing to the rarity of the consonantal conjunction śp, and the embarrassment which would acompany the restoration of the saṃhitā

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 562 form from a pada-reading viṭ-pati.” It may perhaps also be the perceived lack of clarity regarding the derivation of the words, which leads to their indivisi- bility, cf. VPR (5.39: विशौजा इत्यन्यायसमासात्). Whitney on CA (4.2.14 = W: 4.60) mistakenly refers to svaptu viśpatiḥ as AV (ix.5.6). It should read AV (iv.5.6). ४.२.१५. ददातौ तकारादौ । Whitney (4.61), Ha, J, M, O: insert च after ददातौ. Hbc, J, M, P: °नकारादौ. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the preverb] before a t-initial form of the root dā. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ददातौ(H: ददौ) च त(H: न)कारादौ न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘नीत्ता(H, N: ता)’ (not in AV)। ‘वीत्ता’ (not in AV)। ‘परीत्ता’ (not in AV)। ‘परीत्तिः’ (not in AV)। ‘अप्र॑तीत्तम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.११७.१)। ‘परी॑त्तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.९२.२)। ‘प्रत्त(H: त्नं)म्’ (not in AV)। ‘अवत्तम्’ (not in AV)। Note: It is important to note that along with the attested examples apratīttam and parīttaḥ, the APR (p. 145) also cites the unattested examples prattam and avattam, and this is one of those few occasions when both the CAB as well as the APR are citing the same unattested examples, indicating a close relationship between these texts. Whitney observes: “The difficulty of making out an acceptable analysis of them for the pada-text is reason enough for their being treated in that text as indivisibles.” On the forms parītta and avatta cited as indivisible in VPR (5.45), Uvaṭa’s commentary says: तत्र तावत् परीत्तः अवत्तानां सग्धिः एतानि धात्वेकदेश- लोपान्नावगृह्यन्ते. Uvaṭa cites a verse generalizing the principles for indivisibility: आदिमध्यान्तलुप्तानि समासान्य[drop न्य?]न्यायभाञ्जि च । नावगृह्णन्ति कवयः पदान्यागमवन्ति च ॥ The words prattam and avattam are also cited in NR (2.1), and Surya Kanta (APR, p. 145) refers us to Skanda’s commentary on NR : लौकिकाश्चात्र शब्दाः प्रत्तमवत्तमित्यादय उदाहर्तुं प्रक्रान्ताः. This informs us that Yāska was already possibly aware of these forms being non-Vedic.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका563 ४.२.१६. उद हन्तिहरतिस्थास्तम्भिषु । Whitney (4.62), I: उदो हंति°. J, M: °स्तंतिषु. O: °स्थाःस्तंभिषु. P: °हंति । हरतिष्टास्तनिषु. Translation: [The preverb] ud [is not separated with an ava- graha in the Padapāṭha] before [forms of the roots] han, hr̥, sthā, and stambh. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - उदः न अवग्रहो भवति हन्तिहरति- स्थास्तम्भीत्येतेषु परतः । ‘उद्धतः’ (not in AV)। ‘उद्धृ॑- ता(H: तां)’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.५.३४, VVRI edn.: १२.९. ७)। ‘उ॒द्ध्रि॒यमा॑णा(H: णः)’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.५.३४)। ‘उद्धृ॑तेषु’ (पद, अ.वे. १५.१२.१)। ‘[उ]त्त॑भिता’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.१)। ‘उ॒त्था॒तुः’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.४.१४)। ‘उत्थि॑तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.४३.२)। Note: Whitney notes that the combination of ud + han is not attested in the known AV. Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 39) takes this as an indication that the Vulgate is not a genuinely Śaunakīya recension. A more likely possibility is that the CA rule incorporates considerations of general grammar. It should be noted that the APR (pp. 145-6) quotes all the same ex- amples as cited by the CAB including the first unattested example uddhataḥ. This shows that there is a more genuine linkage between these texts and their transmission. Whitney makes some important observations: “The pada-text, however, appears to treat the combinations as inseparable only where there is actual composition, as in the participles, and as would also be the case if the unac- cented preposition preceded the accented verb, for we find út : hara in three passages (iv.14.7, ix.6.19, xii.3.36). For sthā with ud, … it has already been noticed (under ii.18 = CA 2.1.18) that where the preposition would be, by the general rules of combination, disjoined from the verb, it is actually so dis- joined, and that the pada accordingly has út : sthuḥ, út : sthāpaya, etc., where the saṃhitā has útthuḥ, útthāpaya, etc.” This makes it clear that the Padapāṭha saw no difficulty in separating the members where it thought they were not compounded, and therefore, we need to make a clear distinction between vigra-

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 564 ha and avagraha. The complexities which prevented avagraha, did not always prevent the vigraha. However, Whitney correctly observes: “One would have thought it es- pecially desirable that the pada-text should separate ut-hr̥ta etc., in order to mark the forms as coming from the root har, and not from dhar.” ४.२.१७. दधातौ च हकारादौ । Whitney (4.63). J: °नकारादौ. Translation: [There is no separation of the preverb with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] before an h-initial [form of the root] dhā. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दधातौ च हकारादौ [न?] अवग्रहो भवति । ‘ये । द॒ग्धाः । ये । च॒ । उद्धि॑ताः’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.२.३४)। Note: The example úddhitāḥ is also listed as an indivisible word in the APR (p. 146). On uddhitā in AV (19.42.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 964) says: “In b, our pada-mss. have út°hitā, ∀a word-division# which is contrary to Prāt. iv. 63 (= CA 4.2.17) and to the usage of the AV. hitherto; SPP. reads in his pada-text úddhitā, and makes no note upon the matter; ∀he had in fact a note stating that his P.P.2J. also read út°hitā : but, as appears from his ‘Corrections’ to vol. iv., p. 446, his note was disordered in printing;# the comm. has instead uddhr̥tā.” The VVRI edition does not split the word in its pada-text, but cites út-hitā as a manuscript variant. As an exception to this rule, Whitney mentions the form uddhí (viii.8. 22), and says: “our pada-text leaves it undivided, although it does not fall under this rule, being composed of ud and dhi.” There is a doubtful listing of uddhí in APR (p. 145) as an indivisible word. The VVRI edition does not split this word in its pada-text. One wonders if this form was listed in the samudrādi- gaṇa, a list of indivisible words, as conceived by the CA, cf. CA (4.2.8). ४.२.१८. जास्पत्यम् । Whitney (4.64). P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका565 Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the constituents of the expression] jāspatyam. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जास्पत्यमिति च न अवग्रहो भवति । जास्पत्यम् । ‘सम् । जा॒स्प॒त्यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.७३.१०)। जायापत्यम् । यापत्यम् । याशब्दो लु(H: र्लु)प्यते(H: त्त्ये) पत्यौ । असंतुरूष्माशु(?) द्व्यक्षरो जायाः वा जाभावः। Note: Concerning the last portion of the commentary, Whitney says: “Although much corrupted, it is evident that this teaches the same etymology with that given by the Vāj.Pr. (at iv.39: yakārākārayor jāspatye pade): jāspatya for jāyās-patya.” In the present state of the manuscript, this passage cannot be restored to its correct original. The verse seems to say that the word jāspatyam is derived from jāyā+patyam, with the deletion of yā, and insertion of s. The other suggested alternative is to replace the word jāyā with jā. While the CA clearly says that there is no Avagraha for the word jās- patyam, the VVRI edition for AV (W: 7.73.10 = VVRI 7.77.10) reads the Padapāṭha as जाः॒ऽप॒त्यम्, and notes no manuscript variant, except that it points out that the Padapāṭha on RV (5.28.3) reads: जाः॒प॒त्यम्. Whitney, on this CA rule, also notes: “This rule and one in the next section (iv.83), taken together, show that the true pada reading recognized by our treatise is jāḥpatyam; our pada manuscript, however, gives jāḥ-patyam, with avagraha.” In this instance, it would seem that the manuscripts have deviated from the CA rule, while the CA rule represents a situation similar to that in the R̥gveda Padapāṭha. Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 439) remarks: “The Prāt. iv.64 (= CA 4.2.18), 83 (= CA 4.3.11) prescribes jāḥpatyám as pada-reading in c, but all the pada- mss. read jāḥ-patyám, divided, and SPP. accordingly gives that form in his pada-text. The RV. pada reads jāḥpatyám and jā́ḥpátiḥ, but, strangely, jā́ḥ- patim (the two latter occurring only once each).” ४.२.१९. मनुष्यत् । Whitney (4.65). I: °ष्वत्. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [There is no separation of components with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha in the expression] manuṣyat.

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 566 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - मनुष्यदिति च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘इडा॑ । म॒नु॒ष्यत्’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१२.८)। मनुष्यवत् मनु- ष्यत् । यशब्दो लुप्यते वकारस्य च यकारः । Note: Whitney and Roth had chosen manuṣvát in their edition of the AV. On the present CA rule, Whitney admitted: “It is unfortunate that, the Atharvan form of the word being thus fully established [as manuṣyát], and its treatment having been prescribed by the Prātiśākhya with so much care, it should have been altered in the edited text to manuṣvát, even though the latter is theoretically decidedly the preferable reading, and is presented by the Rig-Veda in the corresponding passage (x.110.8).” Elsewhere, Whitney is even more emphatic on manuṣyát : (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 241): “All our mss. have manuṣyát in b ∀and so have all SPP’s authorities#, and this form is authenti- cated by Prāt. iv.65 (= CA 4.2.19), the comment explaining how it is derived from manuṣyavat. As being, therefore, the indubitable AV. reading, it should not have been altered in our edition to -ṣvát, to conform with the four other texts, even though doubtless a corruption of -ṣvát. ∀SPP. also alters it.#” With such clear admissions of error on the part of Whitney, it is unclear why the VVRI edition still opts for the reading manuṣvat. The reading manuṣvát is found in RV (10.110.8), Mādhyandina Śukla-Yajurveda (29.33), and Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa (3.6.3.4). The manuscript I for the CA also has the reading manuṣvát. The APR (p. 148) also has the reading manuṣyat. ४.२.२०. त्रेधा । Whitney (4.66). P has no daṇḍa after this rule. Translation: [There is no separation of components with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha in the expression] tredhā. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ‘त्रे॒धा’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१२.१) इति च अवग्रहो (न?) भवति । … (missing commentary)। Note: The word tredhā́ is an exception to CA (4.1.35: तद्धिते धा). The example tredhā́ is listed among inseparable words in the APR (p. 149). Concerning the lacuna in the manuscript, Whitney says: “It is impossi- ble to say, of course, whether a rule or two has not dropped out.” With sixteen

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका567 more manuscripts, we know that no rule has been dropped. Only a small por- tion of the commentary has been missing. ४.२.२१. संज्ञायाम् । Whitney (4.67). A, B: °यं. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correc- tion. Translation: [There is no separation of components with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] in a name. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - (missing commentary)… ‘अ॒श्व॒त्थाः । न्य॒ग्रोधाः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३७.४)। ‘क॒श्यपः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३७.१)। ‘वि॒श्वामि॑त्रः’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.१५)। बहुल- मिति च वक्तव्यम् । जमदग्न्याद्यर्थम् (H: थर्वं)। ‘जमत्ऽ- अग्ने’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.१६)। ‘भ॒रत्ऽवा॑जम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२९.५)। ‘परा॑ऽशरः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.६५.१)। ‘वामऽदेव’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.३.१६)। Note: Surya Kanta says that the example jamadagnyātharvaṇa cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and he (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. In this particular case, the lone manuscript actually reads jamadagnyātharvaṃ, which Whitney amends without notice to jamadagnyātharvaṇa, which is now claimed by Surya Kanta as possibly belonging to a long-lost genuine Śaunakīya recen- sion of the AV. The manuscript reading can be best emended to jamadagny- ādyarthaṃ. Then follows a list of names beginning with Jamadagni. Thus, this is another case of a ghost word claimed by Surya Kanta as possibly belonging to the so-called genuine Śaunakīya recension. Another matter to be noted is that the passage बहुलमिति च वक्तव्यम् and the following exceptions may indicate either a lapse on the part of the author of the CA, or a change in the AV traditions. In any case, the AV manuscripts do seem to follow this statement of exceptions, rather than following a general prohibition of Avagraha for the proper names suggested by the CA rule. The examples of divisible names offered by the CAB must have been divisible for

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 568 the APR as well, as the APR does not list them among its list of indivisible words. It may be pointed out that at least some of these divisible names also appear as adjectives, e.g. parāśara : índro yātūnā́m abhavat parāśaráḥ (AV 8.4. 21). Here, [Pseudo]-Sāyaṇa paraphrases parāśaráḥ as: parāśātayitā. For a parallel to the doctrine taught in this rule, see APR (217a): रूढिशब्दार्थसंज्ञा ये नेङ्ग्यन्ते ककुभादयः । तच्छास्त्रं शब्दमित्यर्थं यथासूत्रे निपातितम् ॥ The first four examples cited by the CAB are found in the same order in the APR (p. 139). ४.२.२२. व्यधौ । Whitney (4.68), C, E, H: व्यधौ. I: व्यृद्धौ. O: व्यृधौ. Other mss: व्याधौ. P has no daṇḍa after this rule. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the first constituent of a compound-expression] before [a form of the root] vyadh. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - व्यधौ च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘हृ॒द॒या॒विध॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.६.१८)। ‘म॒र्मा॒विधम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.१०.२६, VVRI edn.: ११.१२.२६)। Note: The VVRI edition, p. 1129, points out that the word hr̥dayā- vidham occurring in the Padapāṭha of RV (1.24.8) does have an Avagraha. However, it does not cite any manuscripts of the AV showing this phe- nomenon. Thus, in this case, the AV tradition has remained unaffected by the RV tradition. The examples cited by the CAB are found in APR (p. 146). Surya Kanta (APR, p. 146) says that the CAB on our rule also cites the exam- ple śvāvit (AV 5.13.9) cited by the APR. But, this is not supported by the manuscripts of the CAB. However, all the three examples are cited in the CAB on CA (3.1.3). Whitney observes: “The rule is too broadly stated, and should have been restricted by him [= commentator], as was the preceding one : it is only when a protracted vowel precedes the root that the compound is left undivided; and we have, for instance, vi-vyādhin, abhi-vyādhin (both i.19.1), and kr̥ta- vyadhanī (v.14.9).”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका569 ४.२.२३. दृशि सर्वनाम्नैकारान्तेन । Whitney (4.69), Hc: दृशौ°. P adds a daṇḍa as a correction after दृशि. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha] of a pronominal [form] ending in a or i, before [a form of the root] dr̥ś. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दृशौ च सर्वनाम्ना अकारान्तेन इका- रान्तेन च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘तादृक्(H: त्)’ । ‘तादृशः’ । ‘यादृक्’ । ‘यादृशः’। ‘ई॒दृक्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२७.६)। ‘ईदृशः’ (‘ई॒दृशे॑,’ पद, अ.वे. ३.१.२)। Note: As Whitney notes, the form of this rule is rather strange, where apparently a and ī were fused into e, and then combined with sarvanāmnā to yield sarvanāmnaikārāntena. Whitney proposes to amend the expression to sarvanāmnekārāntena to stand for sarvanāmnā īkārāntena, since the only forms attested in the AV is īdr̥k. However, the reading of the rule as it stands is sup- ported uniformly by all the manuscripts, as well as by the commentary. Also, Whitney disregards dr̥śi given in Ha and Hb, and opts for dr̥śau found in the commentary. However, the reading dr̥śi is uniformly supported by the manu- scripts. For a parallel to this rule, see APR (217a). The APR (p. 135) cites the two attested AV examples. The reason these forms are indivisible is that the pronoun to which a form of dr̥ś is compounded undergoes substantial change. For instance, Pāṇini derives īdr̥śa from idam, by replacing the entire idam with ī, cf. P.6.3.90 (इदं- किमोरीश्की). Also see P.6.3.91 (आ सर्वनाम्नः), which replaces d of tad with ā, before dr̥ś. ४.२.२४. सहावाडन्ते । Whitney (4.70). A, B, D, M, P: सह°. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the first constituent of a compound] before a form of the root saḥ ending in āṭ.

अध्याय ४, पाद २ 570 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - सहौ च परतः आडन्ते न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प्राषाट्’ (not in AV)। ‘तु॒रा॒षाट्’ (पद, अ.वे. २. ५.३)। ‘पृ॒त॒ना॒षा॒ट्’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१४.८)। ‘श॒त्रू॒षा- ण्नी॒षाट्’ (पद ! ‘श॒त्रू॒षाट् । नी॒षाट्’, अ.वे. ५.२०.११)। ‘अ॒भी॒षाड॑स्मि विश्वा॒षाट्’ (पद ! ‘अ॒भी॒षाट् । अ॒स्मि॒ । वि॒श्वा॒षाट्,’ १२.१.५४)। आडन्त इति किमर्थम् । ‘प्रसह- (H, N: °हस°)नम्’ (not in AV)। Note: The examples offered by the CAB on this rule are identical with what we find in the same commentary on CA (2.4.2). ४.२.२५. अव्ययानाम् । Whitney (4.71). J, M: अप्ययानां. P: अध्ययानां and adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: [Components] of indeclinables [are not sepa- rated with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अव्ययानां च न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘प्रा॒तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१६.१)। ‘स॒नु॒तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९२.१, VVRI edn.: ७.९७.१)। ‘स॒नु॒तः । यु॒यो॒तु॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९२.१, VVRI edn.: ७.९७.१)। ‘प्रा॒तः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१६.१)। ‘उ॒च्चैः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१.३)। ‘उ॒च्चात्’ (पद, ‘उ॒च्चा,’ अ.वे. १३.२.३६)। ‘नी॒चैः’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.१.३)। ‘नी॒चा(H: त्वा, Whitney: नीचात्)’ (पद, ‘नी॒चा,’ अ.वे. १.२१.२)। Note: Whitney observes: “The rule does anything but credit to the acuteness of the authors of the Prātiśākhya, for no word in the text which would otherwise be entitled to avagraha is left unresolved on account of its being an indeclinable.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका571 ४.२.२६. आशा दिशि । Whitney (4.72). A, B, D: अशा°. I: 29. Translation: [There is no separation with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha of the constituents of the word] āśā, when it is used in the sense of ‘region.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आशेत्यस्य दिग्वाचि(H: दिग्यानि)शब्दे न अवग्रहो भवति । ‘आशा॑भ्यः’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.५.२९)। ‘आशा॑नाम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.३१.१)। ‘आशाः॑(H: °शाम्) । अनु॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९.२, VVRI edn.: ७.१०.२)। दिशीति किमर्थम् । ‘अ॒भि॒ऽधावा॑मि । आ॒ऽशाम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६. ११९.३)। Note: All the examples as well as the exceptions of the CAB are listed in APR (p. 158). APR (217h, p. 158) reads: अभिधावाम्याशामाशिष्येतदेवावगृह्यते । अतोन्यान्याद्युदात्तानि दिगर्थे नेङ्गयेदसौ ॥ इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः । E, F, H: चतुर्थस्य द्वितीयः पादः. C: चतुर्थे द्वितीयः पादः. A, B, D, J, M, P: द्वितीयः पादः. I: इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य द्वितीयः पादः. O: इत्य. चतुर्थस्य द्वितीयः पादः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ २९ ॥. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चतुर्थस्य द्वितीयः पादः । _________________________________

॥ चतुर्थोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ तृतीयः पादः ॥ ४.३.१. प्रकृतिदर्शनं समापत्तिः । Whitney (4.73). O: °पतिः. Translation: The term ‘reinstatement’ (samāpatti) refers to the display of the original form. Note: Here the term ‘original’ (prakr̥ti) refers to a stage in the deriva- tion of a word, before changes like lengthening, or retroflexion of n or s are effected. The state thus obtained offers us a theoretical starting point for the transformations mentioned above, and while the reinstatement often results in undoing of what Whitney (1862: 219) calls “anomalies of Vedic orthoepy,” it does not necessarily result into a usable expression of the classical language. This is because the process of reinstatement results in undoing of not only Vedic anomalies, but also of some of the changes which are common in the classical language. Such a reinstatement of the derivationally original form takes place in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha, in accordance with the rules that follow. Whitney points out that the term samāpatti does not occur in any other grammatical treatise, though the related term samāpādya occurs once “in one of the later chapters of the Rik Pr. (xiii.11, 12), in a passage so obscure, without the light which the treatment of the subject in our own Prātiśākhya casts upon it, that its meaning has, very naturally, been misapprehended by the learned editor (= Max MÜller).” Now we know that the term does occur precisely in the same meaning as our CA rule in APR (147, p. 99): षत्वणत्वोपाचारदीर्घत्वसमा- पत्तेरपवादः. The finite verb samāpādyate is found in the same meaning in APR (214b), which reinstates the final short vowel in the Padapāṭha for words like jánimā (AV 2.28.2). The term samāpādya also appears in the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, see the note on the next rule. Further it is also found in the Upalekhasūtra (8.18), which is identical with RPR (13, verse 11, sūtra 30). A related term pratyāpatti occurs in Kātyāyana’s Vārttika on the Śiva- sūtras, cf. लिङ्गार्था तु प्रत्यापत्तिः, MB (Kielhorn edn., Vol.I., p. 14). While this term has the sense of reinstatement of an original stripped of unwanted altera- tions, it has nothing to do with the Padapāṭha. However, the term pratyāpatti

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका573 has been used in a sense identical with samāpatti by K.V. Abhyankar (1974: 25-27). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रकृतिदर्शनं षत्वादीनां समापत्तिर्भव- ति । अत्रैवोदाहरिष्यामः । ४.३.२. षत्वणत्वोपाचारदीर्घटुत्वलोपान्पदानां चर्चापरिहारयोः समापत्तिः । Whitney (4.74), C, M: °लोपान्पदानां°. Other mss: °लोपात्पदानां°. E, F, Ha, O: °त्वोपचार°. C, E, F, Ha: °पदानां°. P adds this rule in the margin as a correc- tion. P: °लोपान्पदांतानां°. Translation: In the repetition of a word in the Padapāṭha (= carcā) and in the repetition of a word in the Kramapāṭha (= parihāra), there is reinstatement of the original form in the cases involving the change of s to ṣ, of n to ṇ, of ḥ to s before k and p, lengthening of a vowel, change of a dental stop to a cerebral stop, deletion of an element, and the change of a final ān to āḥ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - षत्वणत्वोपाचारदीर्घटुत्वलोपान्(H: त्)पदानां चर्चापरिहारयोः समापत्तिर्भवति । षत्व । ‘नि॒षे- च॑नम् । नि॒सेच॑न॒मिति॑ नि॒ऽसेच॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३.१)। षत्व । णत्व । ‘प॒राय॑णम् । प॒राय॑न॒मिति॑ परा॒ऽअय॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३४.३)। णत्व । उपाचारः । ‘अ॒ध॒स्प॒दम् । अ॒धः॒प॒दमिति॑ अधःऽप॒दम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. २.७.२)। उपा- चार। दीर्घ(ः)। ‘अ॒भी॒व॒र्तेन॑ । अ॒भि॒व॒र्तेनेत्य॑भिऽवर्त॒ेन’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.२९.१)। दीर्घ । टुत्व । ‘यो वि॑ष्ट॒भ्नाति॑ । वि॒स्त॒भ्नातीति॑ विऽस्त॒भ्नाति॑’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १३.१.२५)। टुत्व। लोप। ‘शे॒प॒हर्ष॑णीम् । शे॒पो॒हर्ष॑णी॒मिति॑ शेपः॒ऽहर्ष॑- णीम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. ४.४.१)। लोप । आन्पद (H: आनं- पद) । ‘सा॒ला॒वृ॒काँ इ॑व । सा॒ला॒वृ॒कानि॒वेति॑ सा॒ला॒वृ॒कान्ऽ- इ॑व’ (क्रम, अ.वे. २.२७.५)।

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 574 Note: As Whitney explains: “Carcā1 (see iv. 123 = CA 4.4.24) des- ignates the repetition, with iti interposed, made in the pada-text of a divisible compound which is also pragr̥hya, or which ends in a vowel not subject to the ordinary rules of combination: for example, satyānr̥té íti satya-anr̥té (i.33.2); parihāra (see iv. 117 = CA 4.4.18) is the like repetition made in the krama-text of a pragr̥hya, a divisible compound, a word requiring restoration to its natural form, and the last word before a pause.” The term upācāra refers to the change of ḥ to s before k and p by CA (2.3.3 etc.). The term ṭutva reminds one of the usage in P.8.1.41 (ष्टुना ष्टुः), and refers to the change of t-series to ṭ-series. The marker U added to the initial stop of a stop series becomes a notation for the whole series of five members, cf. P.1.1.69 (अणुदित् सवर्णस्य चाप्रत्ययः). The CA seems to have taken such conventions for granted and saw no need to explicitly define them. Compare the following verse of the Māṇḍūkīśikṣā (verse 108), Śikṣā- saṃgraha, p. 472: षत्वणत्वमुपाचारो दीर्घीभावस्तथैव च । यस्मिन् पदे निपद्यन्ते तत् समासा(पा?)द्यलक्षणम् ॥ For ān-pada, also see: RPR (4.67). For further discussion on śepa- harṣaṇīm, see Note on CA (2.2.17). The terminology used in our CA rule is comparable to the wording of APR (147). Whitney (1862: pp. 220-221) notes some major problems, for which I must quote him at length: “A quite embarrassing question now presents itself, in connec- tion with the part of the text contained in this and the following rules; namely, with reference to the constitution of the pada-text which they imply. The actual pada-text of our manuscripts is very sparing in its use of carcā, or repetition with iti interposed : it avails itself of that expedient only in the case already referred to as prescribed by iv.123 (= CA 4.4.24) or when a pragr̥hya is likewise avagr̥hya. … Now when we find put forth in our treatise, as its leading and principal direction for the restoration of the natural form in pada, a rule like the one here given, which classes pada repetitions and krama repetitions together, and corresponds, as regards the pada, nearly with the Vāj. Pr., we cannot help suspecting that it contemplates a pada-text in

1 The word carcāpadāni is also used with reference to split up words of the rules of Pāṇini by Patañjali in his MB, न केवलानि चर्चापदानि व्याख्यानम् - वृद्धिः आत् ऐजिति ।, Vol. I, p. 11.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका575 which, as in that of the Vāj. Saṃhitā, the repetitions of krama and pada extend over nearly the same classes of cases. It is actually the fact that, if we allow the pada-text to be of the form in which our manuscripts give it, there are but about half a dozen words in the whole Atharvan text to which this rule and the two following, all together, have any application : while on the other hand, the Prātiśākhya is found to give no direction at all for the use of iti alone in pada after a pragr̥hya, or for the innumerable restitutions of natural form which are made in words not repeated. I find myself, I must acknowledge, hardly able to avoid the conclusion that this part of our Prātiśākhya was framed to suit a pada-text in which all pragr̥hyas, divisible words, and words requiring restoration to normal form, were alike repeated, or suffered carcā : such seems to me to be the only intelligible and consistent interpretation of its rules. That the fourth section of the chapter contains a direction for carcā agreeing with the nature of our extant pada-text, would find its explanation in the evident character of that section as a foreign addition to the main body of the work; we should have to assume that the school to which the treatise as a whole belonged, in its present form, framed its pada-text in the manner there taught, and probably suffered that rule to take the place of one of another character formerly contained in this section, and now omitted from it; while yet they did not so recast the section as to adapt it fully to their new method of construction of the pada. This may seem like a violent and improbable supposition; but it appears to me, after making every possible attempt to avoid it, to involve less difficulty that the interpretation of the rules of this section in such a manner as to make them suit the pada-text of the manuscripts. … One other solution of our difficulties, less satisfactory, but also less violent, deserves to be suggested. If we could omit the words carcāparihārayoḥ from the rule altogether, leaving the latter to authorize a restoration of normal form in the pada generally, we could perhaps make shift to get along with such inconcinnities and omissions as would still remain – of which the principal would be that the treatise made no provision for the use of iti after a pragr̥hya word, and that it did not direct what form words should have in the numerous repetitions of the krama-text.”

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 576 In response to Whitney’s proposals, we must make the following ob- servations. The text of the CA as reconstructed on the basis of all the available manuscripts does not support Whitney’s second solution of omitting the words carcāparihārayoḥ from the present rule. Secondly, the rules do not specify where carcā occurs in the Padapāṭha, but what to do when it occurs, thus giving us no direct clue to the extent of carcā to be carried out in the Padapāṭha. Thus, there is really no reason to claim that the CA assumes a different Padapāṭha in which carcā was carried out more massively, as compared to the Padapāṭha available in the manuscripts. Actu- ally, the fact that the existing Padapāṭha for the ŚAV deviates from the Pada- pāṭha of the RV and VS, would itself be an indication of its independent trans- mission. As Whitney himself observes elsewhere, the Padapāṭha for the 19th Kāṇḍa considerably deviates from the rest of the earlier Kāṇḍas, and the fact that this deviation is in the direction of the RV Padapāṭha would suggest that the Padapāṭha that we have for the first 18 Kāṇḍas is fairly authentic. Finally, we should note that in citing examples of repetitions, the com- mentary nowhere specifies whether it is citing from the Padapāṭha, or from the Kramapāṭha. Whitney (1862: 222) remarks: “The commentator does not state whether he takes his instances from the pada or from the krama text : according to the construction of our present pada, they could only come from krama, if the conclusion drawn above as to the original pada contemplated by our text is correct, they may illustrate both.” Now, it is safer to assume that most of the instances of repetitions are from the Kramapāṭha, where they occur on a vastly larger scale, than to assume that all these examples are equally representative of a now-lost original Padapāṭha. It seems to me that the CA (4.4.24: प्रगृह्यावगृह्यचर्चायां क्रमवदुत्तरस्मिन्नवग्रहः) provides some clue that the scope of carcā and parihāra was different. The repetitions were carried out on a much larger scale in the Kramapāṭha as com- pared to the Padapāṭha, and that is why the rule says kramavat, namely that the rules of restoration in repetitions were primarily meant to apply to the Kramapāṭha, and were to be extended by analogy to the smaller corpus of repetitions in the Padapāṭha. Such is my conclusion based on the CA rule, and this agrees with Whitney’s observation that “the actual pada-text of our manu- scripts is very sparing in its use of carcā, or repetition with iti interposed : it avails itself of that expedient only in the case already referred to as prescribed by iv.123 (= CA 4.4.24), or when a pragr̥hya is likewise avagr̥hya.” This is supported by the CAB on CA (4.4.24).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका577 यस्मिन्नवगृह्यत्वं [प्रगृह्यत्वं च ] एकस्मिन्नेव युगपद्भवति तत्प्रगृह्यावगृह्यम् । तत्र(H: व) चर्चायां क्रमवद्भवति । चर्चा द्वि(H: दि)र्वचनमित्युक्तम् । पदकालेऽपि तच्च क्रमकाले इव भवति । तस्य क्रमकालस्य रूपं परिहरेत्। प्रगृह्याणि चावगृह्याणि च परे क्रमे परिक्रि(ह्रि?)यन्ते । प्रगृह्यावगृह्यं पुनः पदेष्वेव परिक्रि(ह्रि?)यते । तत्र चावग्रहः कथम् । उत्तरस्मिन्नवग्रहः । उत्तरस्मिन्नेव द्वितीयेऽवग्रहः कार्यः । न प्रथमे । ‘विरू॑पे॒ इति॒ विऽरू॑पे’ (अ.वे. १०.७.६, ४२)। Comparable to the use of the expression kramavat in CA (4.4.24) is the use of the expression padavat in the Upalekhasūtras (5.1, 5.3, 6.6, 6.7, 7.9 etc.), where the basic rules describe what happens in the Padapāṭha, and the description of what happens in the Kramapāṭha takes place by simply referring to padavat. S.S. Pandit (AV edition, Vol.I., p. 5) refers to “a Vaidika of the Atharvaveda from Māhulī; his full name is Keśava Bhaṭ bin Dājī Bhaṭ. He knew the Saṃhitā and Pada texts by heart as also the Krama of the first four Kāṇḍas.” Later (ibid., p. 8), Pandit refers to another reciter: “This is Venkaṇ Bhaṭjī otherwise known as Venku Dājī. … He knew the whole of the Saṃhitā and the Pada text by heart and a considerable portion in the form of Krama and Jaṭā.” Unfortunately, Pandit did not make any record of the Krama and the Jaṭāpāṭha recitations, and that information is now mostly lost to us, since none of the present day AV reciters are capable of reciting these versions. Whitney too was merely theorizing about the Kramapāṭha, and had, as far as I can tell, no access to a manuscript of Krama. Now I have found three important manuscripts at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, which give us at least a glimpse of these advanced recitational versions. There are two manuscripts (BORI, Mss. 128/1879-80 and 83/1880-81) which provide the Jaṭāpāṭha for the 15th and the 17th Kāṇḍas, respectively. There is also a manuscript (BORI: 133/1879-80) of the Kramapāṭha for the 20th Kāṇḍa. I have been currently transcribing these manuscripts and hope to publish these texts along with my analysis in future. While I do not wish to go into details of these texts at this point, I would like to mention a few important differences from the manner of citations in our commentary and the pattern found in the manuscripts of Krama and Jaṭāpāṭha. The examples of samāpatti cited in the CAB typically read like: | ‘नि॒षेच॑नम् । नि॒सेच॑न॒मिति॑ नि॒ऽसेच॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३.१). This gives an impression that the reinstatement phrase like nisecanam iti ni ’secanam immediately follows after the original Pada: niṣecanam. The pattern noticed in the manuscripts of Jaṭā and Kramapāṭha is somewhat different. In

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 578 the Kramapāṭha, if we have a sequence of three Padas, e.g. a, b, and c, with the Pada b undergoing reinstatement, we get the following sequence: ab / bc / b iti b. For example, notice the reinstatement for the word puruṣṭuta (AV 20.15.4, BORI ms 133/1879-80, folio 12): व॒यं पु॑रुष्टुत । पु॒रु॒ष्टु॒त॒ ये । पु॒रु॒स्तु॒तेति॑ पुरु°स्तुत. A minor feature to note is that the BORI manuscripts for Krama and Jaṭā use a small circle to indicate the avagraha. A similar general pattern for reinstatement is noticed in the manuscript for the Jaṭāpāṭha. In a sequence of Padas, such as a, b, and c, if the Pada b requires reinstatement, we get the following recitational sequence: abbaab / bccbbc / b iti b. To illustrate this pattern, I can offer the following example from AV (15.2.6, BORI ms 128/1879-80, folio 11): च॒ प॒रि॒ष्क॒न्दौ प॑रिष्क॒न्दौ च॑ च परिष्क॒न्दौ । प॒रि॒ष्क॒न्दौ मनो॒ मनः॑ परिष्क॒न्दौ प॑रिष्क॒न्दौ मनः॑ । प॒रि॒स्क॒न्दाविति॑ प॒रि॒°स्क॒न्दौ. However, the general features of reinstatement as described by the CA and the CAB are confirmed by the newly found manuscripts of Kramapāṭha and Jaṭāpāṭha. ४.३.३. पूर्वपदनिमित्तानाम् । Whitney (4.75), E, F, Hac, O: add च. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [In the repetitions of the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha, there is reinstatement of the originals of also those transformations] which are caused by [conditioning elements residing in] the preceding words [i.e. preceding components of compounds]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पूर्वपदनिमित्तानां च षत्वादीनां समा- पत्तिर्भवति। एतान्येवोदाहरणानि । पूर्वपदनिमित्तानामिति किमर्थम् । ‘प॒रि॒रा॒पिण॒मिति॑ परिऽरा॒पिण॑म्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. ५.७.२)। ‘सु॒त्रामा॑ण॒मिति॑ सु॒ऽत्रामा॑णम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. ७.६. ३)। Note: The commentary does not offer any new positive examples of reinstatement, but refers us to examples on the preceding rule, such as: ‘नि॒षेच॑नम् । नि॒सेच॑न॒मिति॑ नि॒ऽसेच॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘प॒राय॑णम् । प॒राय॑न॒मिति॑ परा॒ऽअय॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३४.३)।. However, it does offer counter examples where the reinstatement does not take place, because the cause for the trans- formations is within the same word.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका579 Whitney, along with a small number of manuscripts, has the reading पूर्वपदनिमित्तानां च. With this reading in mind, Whitney objects to the treatment given to this rule by the commentator: “He cites no examples, but says ‘the il- lustrations are those already given:’ namely, under the preceding rule. Ac- cording to this exposition, the present rule would seem merely an explanatory appendage to its predecessor. But this is clearly inadmissible: not only ought we to have it, in that case, combined with the other, so as to form part of it, but more especially, it would not contain the particle ca, ‘and,’ which positively stamps it as something added to the latter. We cannot avoid, as it seems to me, understanding rule 74 (= CA 4.3.2) of the abnormal changes of disjoined and independent words, and rule 75 (= CA 4.3.3) of such as are produced by an altering influence in the prior member of a compound.” A good deal of the force of Whitney’s argument is lost when we realize that a majority of the manuscripts do not have ca in the rule, and I have not reconstructed it in my critical text. ४.३.४. इङ्ग्यानाम् । Whitney (4.76). A, B, C, D, Hcb, J: इग्यानां. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [There is also reinstatement in the repetitions in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original forms for trans- formations of the words] which are divisible [with an avagraha in the repetitions]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इङ्ग्यमानानाम् अवगृह्यमाणानां च षत्वादीनां समापत्तिर्भवति । एतान्येवोदाहरणानि । इङ्ग्या- नामिति किमर्थम् । ‘परि॑ष्कृता’ (क्रम ! ‘परि॑ऽस्कृता’, अ.वे. ९.३.१०)। ‘प्रा॒णन्ति॑’ (क्रम ! ‘प्र॒ऽअ॒नन्ति॑,’ अ.वे. १.३२.१)। ‘अनिङ्ग्यत्वात्समापत्तिरेषु नेलपदेषु(?) तु । उत्पन्नेऽवग्रहे चात्र समापत्तिस्तथैव च ॥ ‘सनृता॑वत्’ (अ.वे. ५.२०.६) ‘अ॒पा॒ष्ठ(H: ष्ट)व॑त्’ (अ.वे. १४.१.२९) इत्युदाहरेत् ।’ (source?)

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 580 Note: It should be carefully noted that the reinstatement (samāpatti) prescribed here does not occur in the normal Padapāṭha for these words. The normal Padapāṭha readings for the above forms are परि॑ष्कृता, प्रा॒णन्ति॑, सनृता॑ऽवत्, and अ॒पा॒ष्ठऽव॑त्, respectively, and show no restoration taught by this rule. We, however, understand that there is samāpatti in the Kramapāṭha. Also, as Whitney notes: “The rule, as these illustrations help to show, is not a mere additional specification to the one preceding, affecting only the cases to which the other applies : in that case it would have been incorporated with it, not made to follow it, as an independent precept; but it concerns all changes occurring in the interior of divisible words, whether in the former or the latter member, and a part of the commentator’s examples, rehearsed under rule 75 (= CA 4.3.3) belong to it, and not to the latter.” The APR (147, p. 99) lists the examples sūnŕ̥tāvat (AV 13.1.1) and apāṣṭhávat (AV 14.1.29) as exceptions to the procedure of samāpatti, and Surya Kanta interprets this as saying that we do not get the restored forms sunŕ̥tā-vat and apasthá-vat. ४.३.५. अन्येनापि पर्वणा । Whitney (4.77). A, B, D: अंन्ये°. Translation: [There is also reinstatement in the in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original forms for transfor- mations of the words], even when a separation [with an ava- graha] occurs at a different joint [than the one which led to the transformation in the first place]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अन्येनापि पर्वणा इङ्ग्यमानानां च षत्वादीनां समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘विसि॑तऽस्रु(H: सु)पः’ (पद- क्रम, संहिता ! ‘विषि॑तस्रुपः,’ अ.वे. ६.६०.१)। ‘अ॒भि॒ऽ- निः॒पत॑न्(H: निष्पतत्) (क्रम, संहिता ! ‘अ॒भि॒नि॒ष्पत॑न्’), अपी॑पतत्’ (अ.वे. ७.६४.१, VVRI edn.: ७.६६.१)। ‘विस्थि॑ताःऽइव’ (पद-क्रम, संहिता ! ‘विष्ठि॑ता इव,’ अ.वे. ७.११५.४)। ‘बृह॒स्पति॑ऽप्रनुत्तानाम्’ (पद-क्रम, संहि- ता ! ‘बृह॒स्पति॑प्रणुत्तानाम्,’ अ.वे. ८.८.१९)। ‘पृ॒ष॒दा॒ज्यऽ- प्र॑नुत्तानाम्’ (पद-क्रम, संहिता ! ‘पृ॒ष॒दा॒ज्यप्र॑णुत्तानाम्,’

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका581 अ.वे. ११.१०.१९, VVRI edn.: ११.१२.१९)। ‘दु॒र्नि॒हि॒त॒ऽ- ए॒षिणी॑म्’ (पद-क्रम, संहिता ! ‘दु॒र्णि॒हि॒तै॒षिणी॑म्’, अ.वे. ११.९.१५)। ‘प्रकृत्या ष(H: म)त्वणत्वं यदवगृह्ये तथैव तत् । उप॒तिष्ठ॑न्ती (अ.वे. १२.५.२४) प्रपणादीन्युदाहरेत् ॥’ (source?) (‘प्र॒प॒णः,’ अ.वे. ३.१५.४) Note: Whitney translates this rule as: “In which case restoration is made, even when the word is farther compounded with another member.” This translation is further explained: “That is to say : a compound which, being divi- sible by avagraha, is entitled to restoration of the normal form of its constituent parts, retains its right even when, by farther composition, the division of its original members is lost.” The commentary CAB seems to take a more justifiable approach. It continues the word इङ्ग्यानाम् into this rule: अन्येनापि पर्वणा इङ्ग्यमानानाम्. For ex- ample, in the word víṣitasrupaḥ (AV 6.60.1), the change of s to ṣ occurs be- cause of compounding ví+sita. Once this joint were separated with an ava- graha, one would expect the dental s to be restored. However, in the carcā and parihāra type of repetitions, the expression víṣitasrupaḥ is separated at another juncture, e.g. vísita-srupaḥ. Here, the old joint between ví and sita remains un- separated, and yet, by the present rule, there is restoration of the original sita, giving us vísita-srupaḥ. Whitney considers the cited verse to be “more than usually mutilated and obscure,” and he refuses to translate it. He reads matvaṇatvaṃ and avagr̥hyet tathaiva. Of these, matva is clearly a mistake for ṣatva, and the second expression clearly reads in H as: avagr̥hye tathaiva. With these correc- tions, the verse no longer remains mutilated and obscure. The verse says that the retroflex ṣ and ṇ, which are part of the original form (prakr̥tyā), remain un- altered even after the separation of constituent members of a word with an ava- graha. For example, in the form upatíṣṭhantī (AV 12.5.24), the occurrence of ṣ is not caused by joining upa to the root, and hence, the separation of upa does not lead to the reinstatement of ṣ to s. Similarly, in the example prapaṇáḥ (AV 3.15.4), the retroflex ṇ is part of the original root, and is not brought about by the combination of that root with pra. Therefore, separation of that preverb does not lead to the reinstatement of ṇ to n.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 582 In most of the above examples, the Pada as well as Krama show the re- sult of samāpatti, even when no repetition (carcā or parihāra) is involved. Thus, this is a more generic rule, as compared to the previous rules. The only case where the Pada text given in the VVRI edition does not show samāpatti is AV (7.66.1 = W: 7.64.1): अ॒भि॒ऽनि॒ष्पत॑न्. It is not clear why there is no samā- patti in this case, as it is seen in others. Whitney also notes this anomaly and suggests that the writing of ṣ in such examples may simply be an attempt at representing the labial spirant, i.e. upadhmānīya. He cites other cases where the same thing happens for the jihvāmūlīya. Concerning the textual variation, Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 431) says: “Prāt. iv.77 (= CA 4.3.5) appears to require as pada-reading in b abhi-niḥpátan; but all the pada-mss. give -niṣp-, and SPP. also adopts that in his pada-text: abhinipatan would be a decidedly preferable reading.” One should also note the fact that while the CA rule would require samāpatti in the form of abhi-niḥpatan, the lone manuscript of the commentary reads -niṣpatat. Thus, the manuscripts of the commentary CAB seem to come under the influence of the majority of the later mss. of the AV, and this influence often manifests in the citations of forms which violate the very rules which they are supposed to illustrate. Whitney offers several more examples for this rule: viskandha-dūṣaṇa (AV 2.4.1), atisthā-vant (AV 3.22.6), su-pranīti (AV 5.11.5), durnāma-cātana (AV 8.6.3), anu-visicyate (AV 8.10.33), abhimoda-mud (AV 11.7.26), jāgrat- suḥsvapnyam and svapne-duḥsvapnyam (AV 16.6.9), pr̥thivisat-bhyaḥ (AV 18.4.78). Exceptions to this rule are made in rule CA (4.3.25). ४.३.६. क्रमे परेण विगृह्यात् । Whitney (4.78). J, M (corr): °विगृह्यते. Translation: In the Kramapāṭha, [reinstatement of a given word to its original form, away from its transformations] caused by the disjoinable [previous or the following word, is made when that given word is] joined together with another word [and disjoined from the word which caused that transfor- mation]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - क्रमे परेण प्रसन्धाने विगृह्यान्निमित्तात् षत्वादीनां समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘आपो॒ हि ष्ठा म॑यो॒भुवः॑’ (अ.वे. १.५.१, क्रम ! ‘आपो॒ हि । हि ष्ठ । स्था

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका583 म॑यो॒भुवः॑’)। ‘परि॑ णो वृङ्धि’ (अ.वे. ६.३७.२, क्रम ! ‘परि॑ णः । नो॒ वृ॒ङ्धि॒’)। विगृह्यादिति किमर्थम् । ‘पृ॒थि॒व्यां ते॑ । ते॒ नि॒षेच॑नम् । नि॒षेच॑नं ब॒हिः । नि॒सेच॑न॒मिति॑ नि॒ऽसेच॑नम्’ (क्रम, अ.वे. १.३.१)। ‘आय॑ने ते । आय॑न इ॒त्याऽअय॑ने । ते॒ प॒राय॑णे । प॒राय॑णे॒ दूर्वा॑ । प॒राय॑न॒ इति॑ प॒रा॒ऽअय॑ने’ (क्रम, अ.वे. ६.१०६.१)। Note: As Whitney explains: “Vigr̥hya denotes a word which is alto- gether independent, and therefore disjoined from others in the pada-text, a nānāpada, in distinction from avagr̥hya, which means ‘divisible into its con- stituents (pūrvapada and uttarapada), as a compound.’ In the construction of the krama-text, then, where each word is in succession taken along with its predecessor and its successor, a word which in saṃhitā has an abnormal form, under the influence of the former or of the latter, retains that form when in the same kramapada with the alternating word, but is restored to its natural form when making a kramapada with any other word.” Thus, when the original sequence āpo hi ṣṭhā mayobhuvaḥ is changed into its Krama version, we get the following kramapadas : āpo hi / hi ṣṭha / sthā mayobhuvaḥ. Here, in the second kramapada, we get the form ṣṭha. Its cere- bralization is caused by the i that precedes within the same kramapada, but it is stripped of its long ā, which is caused in the saṃhitā by its connection with the following word, from which it is disjoined. In the next kramapada, we have the form sthā. Here, it has the long vowel caused by its joining the following word, but it is stripped of its cerebrals, because it is disjoined from the pre- ceding word. Thus, this reinstatement of the original form in the Kramapāṭha is a dynamic interactive process, and works feature by feature, depending upon the cause being joined or disjoined. The BORI manuscript (133/1879-80, folio 49) of the Kramapāṭha provides an example of this kind in AV (20.67.1): सु॒न्वा॒नो हि । हि ष्म॑ । स्मा॒ यज॑ति. Folio 51 offers an example from AV (20.68.11): नि षी॑दत । सी॒द॒तेन्द्र॑म्. Whitney explains the counter-examples: “Here the ṣ of niṣecanam and ṇ of parāyaṇe are maintained wherever the words containing them enter into a kramapada, and only suffer restoration (by rule 75 = CA 4.3.3 above) to s and n in the repetition or parihāra.” Compare the example from AV (20.88.1) found in the BORI manuscript (133/1879-80, folio 64): बृह॒स्पति॑स्त्रिषध॒स्थः । त्रि॒ष॒ध॒स्थो रवे॑ण । त्रि॒स॒ध॒स्थ इति॑ त्रि॒°स॒ध॒स्थः.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 584 ४.३.७. दीर्घस्य विरामे । Whitney (4.79). Translation: [There is reinstatement] of a long vowel [appearing in the Saṃhitāpāṭha to the original short vowel] before pause [in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घस्य विरामे समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘आपः॑ । हि। स्थ । म॒यः॒ऽभुवः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.५.१, संहिता ! ‘आप॒ो हि ष्ठा म॑य॒ोभुवः॑,’ क्रम ! ‘हि ष्ठ । स्था म॑यो॒भुवः॑’)। ‘पर्व॑ । अ॒स्य॒ । ग्रभी॑ता’ (पद, अ.वे. १.१२.२, संहिता ! ‘पर्वा॑स्या॒ ग्रभी॑ता,’ क्रम ! ‘पर्वा॑स्य। अ॒स्या॒ ग्रभी॑ता’)। विराम इति किमर्थम् । ‘आपो॒ हि ष्ठा म॑यो॒भुवः॑’ । ‘पर्वा॑स्या॒ ग्रभी॑ता’ । Note: As Whitney explains: “The rule, however, evidently applies not less to the krama than to the pada text, and is even intended chiefly for the for- mer : it is our authority for shortening a protracted final when it comes to stand at the end of a kramapada, while it is left long when taken together with its suc- cessor.” For an example attested in the BORI Krama manuscript, see the note on the preceding rule. ४.३.८. चतूरात्रोऽवग्रह एव । Whitney (4.80). A, B, Hb: चतु°. Translation: In the expression catūrātráḥ (AV 11.7.11), [re- instatement of ū in catū to original short u] takes place only when [the component catū is] separated with an avagraha [from the following component rātráḥ in the Padapāṭha and Krama- pāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - चतूरात्र इति अवग्रह एव समापत्ति- र्भवति । ‘च॒तू॒रा॒त्रः प॑ञ्चरा॒त्रः’ (अ.वे. ११.७.११)। (क्रम !) ‘च॒तू॒(H: तु)रा॒त्र इति॑ चतुःऽरा॒त्रः’ ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका585 Note: Whitney explains: “From rule 74 (= CA 4.3.2), which pre- scribes restoration of the normal form of a lengthened vowel in both parts of a repetition, one might draw the conclusion that the word here in question should be written, when repeated, caturātra iti catuḥ-rātraḥ : hence this rule, which teaches the reading catūrātra iti catuḥ-rātraḥ.” Whitney recognizes that the commentator is citing the Kramapāṭha when he says: catūrātra iti catuḥ-rātraḥ. However, we must note the fact that this word is separable with an avagraha in the Padapāṭha, and the Padapāṭha reading as given in the VVRI edn. shows the application of this rule: catuḥ-rātraḥ. Whitney (AV Translation, Vol.II., p. 645) himself notes the pada reading catuḥ-rātraḥ and says that it is the subject of the present CA rule. Thus, on the basis of all known evidence, this rule is applicable to the Padapāṭha as well, where the components of the word are separated with an avagraha. ४.३.९. पदान्तविकृतानाम् । Whitney (4.81). Translation: [There is reinstatement of the original forms] of [transformations such as] the change of word-final [i before dissimilar vowels to y, when the word comes to stand before a pause in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पदान्तविकृतानां च यत्वादीनां समा- पत्तिर्भवति। ‘प॒रि॒ऽएति॑ । रक्ष॑न्(H: त्)’ (पद, अ.वे. ४. ३८.५, संहिता ! ‘प॒र्येति॒ रक्ष॑न्’)। ‘अ॒भि॒ऽऐमि॑ । दे॒वाः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.११८.३, संहिता ! ‘अ॒भ्यैमि॑ देवाः’)। Note: Whitney has a puzzling remark on the commentary: “The commentator’s paraphrase is padāntavikr̥tānāṃ ca ṣatvādīnāṃ samāpattir bhavati, which would seem to show that he understands the rule as referring to the same series of abnormal alterations which was detailed in rule 74 (= CA 4.3.2). His illustrations, however, put quite another face upon the matter. … Here the only changes of form which have undergone restoration are the regu- lar conversions of i into y (by iii.39 = CA 3.2.16) before the following dis- similar vowel. We are thus guided to a different interpretation of the rule: whereas we have heretofore dealt with irregular or abnormal changes only, learning under what circumstances, in pada and in krama, they become re-

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 586 versed, and the original form restored, here we are taught that all alterations made at the end of a word, by the ordinary as well as the extraordinary combi- nations of the phrase, undergo restoration when the word comes to stand, in pada or in krama, before a pause (virāme, rule 79 = CA 4.3.7). It should be remarked that the final repetition of this rule is wanting in the manuscript, and that we cannot therefore be certain that we may not have lost with it other ex- amples and farther exposition, which would have set the meaning of the rule, or the commentator’s apprehension of it, in a clearer light.” I now have a complete photocopy of the original Berlin manuscript, H, which was handcopied by (or for?) Whitney. The manuscript clearly reads य- त्वादीनां समापत्तिर्भवति, and not षत्वादीनां as claimed by Whitney. Additionally, Whitney’s claim that “the final repetition of this rule is wanting in the manu- script” is also not supported by the manuscript which clearly shows this final repetition. Thus, one wanders how accurate the hand-copy made by Whitney was. Perhaps, not unlike the original copyist, Whitney himself (or one who copied the text for him) occasionally miscopied the text. Since, the original manuscript was in Germany, and he had no continuous access to it, he was un- able to correct his own errors in copying the manuscript. On the other hand, Whitney is absolutely correct that this rule requires reinstatement of the origi- nals of all word-final changes, rather than the restoration of only the ‘abnor- mal’ changes. ४.३.१०. अभ्यासविनतानां च । Whitney (4.82). A, B, D: °वितनां°. I: 10. Transformation: [There is restoration of the original form] of cerebralization caused by [the preceding] reduplicated sylla- ble [in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभ्यासविनतानां च षत्वादीनां समा- पत्तिर्भवति। ‘सु॒सदत॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२६.४, संहिता ! ‘सु॒षू॒दत॑’)। ‘अ॒भि। सि॒स्य॒दे॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.५.९, संहिता ! ‘अ॒भि सि॑ष्यदे’)। ‘आ । सु॒स्वय॑न्ती’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१२. ६, संहिता ! ‘आ सु॒ष्वय॑न्ती’)। ‘सि॒सा॒सवः॑ । सि॒सा॒स॒थ॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.२१.३, संहिता ! ‘सि॒षा॒सवः॑ सिषासथ’)। ‘सि॒सा॒स॒ति॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १३.२.१४, संहिता

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका587 ! ‘सि॒षा॒-स॒ति॒’)। ‘सु॒सु॒वे’ (पद, अ.वे. १४.१.४३, संहिता ! ‘सु॒षु॒वे’)। Note: As Whitney notes: “The Prātiśākhya now goes on to inform us where restoration must be made of alterations which have taken place in the interior of a word, and not under the influence of any cause lying outside of the word itself. The rules in this portion of the work are in great part the reverse of others formerly given, when the subject under treatment was the conversion of pada into saṃhitā. Thus, the present precept is the correlative of ii.91 (= CA 2.4.11).” Restorations of this kind are now confirmed for the Kramapāṭha in the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. Folio 49 provides the following instance from AV (20.67.1): इत्सि॑षासति । सि॒षा॒स॒ति॒ स॒हस्रा॑ । सि॒सा॒स॒तीति॑ सिसासति. We should also note that the so-called ‘original’ form restored by rules like these in the Padapāṭha is simply a stage in the derivation of the word, prior to the application of the cerebralization rule. It is ‘original’ in a theoretical sense, namely it is prior in the derivational sequence. ४.३.११. स्त्रैषूयं नार्षदेन दुष्टरं त्रैष्टुभं त्रैहायणाज्जास्पत्यम् । Whitney (4.83). A, B: त्रैषूय°. Hc, I, M, O: omit त्रैष्टुभं. A, B: °न्नैहायणा°. P adds daṇḍas after each of the first three words of this rule, and it adds a daṇḍa after the last word as a correction. Translation: [There is reinstatement, in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha, of the originals of the various transformations in the expressions] straiṣūyam, nārṣadena, duṣṭaram, traihāyaṇāt, and jāspatyam. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्त्रैषूयं नार्षदेन दुष्टरं त्रैहायणात् जा- स्पत्यमिति च समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘स्त्रैसू॑यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६. ११.३, संहिता ! ‘स्त्रैषू॑यम्’)। ‘ना॒र्स॒देन॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ४. १९.२, संहिता ! ‘ना॒र्ष॒देन॑’)। ‘दु॒स्तर॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६. ४.१, संहिता ! ‘दु॒ष्टर॑म्’)। ‘त्रैस्तु॑भम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९. १०.१, VVRI edn.: ९.१५.१, संहिता ! ‘त्रैष्टु॑भम्’)। ‘त्रै॒हा॒य॒नात्’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.५.२२; १२.४.१६, संहिता

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 588 ! ‘त्रै॒हा॒य॒णात्’)। ‘जाः॒प॒त्यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.७३.१०, संहिता ! ‘जा॒स्प॒त्यम्’)। Note: Whitney appropriately notes that the alterations in these words are restored, even though these are not avagr̥hya words. However, the Pada manuscripts do show jāḥ-patyam as an avagr̥hya form. It is not clear whether this is simply the copyist’s error in the Pada manuscripts, or a reflection of a different of opinion. However, the CA and the APR (p. 145) agree on treating jāspatyam as an indivisible expression. For a discussion on jāspatyam, see Note on CA (4.2.18). On nārṣdena (AV 4.19.2), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 183) says: “The pada-mss. waver between nārsadéna and nārṣ- (our Bp. emends ṣ to s; Op. is altered obscurely; D.K. have s), but s is certainly the true reading, as required by Prāt. iv.83 (= CA 4.3.11); SPP. has wrongly chosen ṣ for his pada-text.” The VVRI edition reads nārṣadena in its Padapāṭha, while it notes the variant nārsadena in the footnotes. Referring to duṣṭara, Surya Kanta (APR, p. 142) suggests: “The Pada- reading dustá- instead of duḥ-tá- indicates that the authors of that text regarded it as an irregular compound of duḥ and stára from the root star.” Restoration of this word in the Kramapāṭha is now confirmed by the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. Folio 51 offers an instance from AV (20.67.2): च॒ दु॒ष्टर॑म् । दु॒स्तर॒मिति॑ दु॒स्तर॑म्. ४.३.१२. अभ्यासस्य परोक्षायाम् । Whitney (4.84). B, D: °परोक्षयां. Translation: [There is reinstatement, in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha, of the original shape] of the reduplication in a per- fect form. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभ्यासस्य परोक्षायां समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘त॒तृ॒पुः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.७.१३, संहिता ! ‘ता॒तृ॒पुः॒’)। ‘व॒वृ॒तुः’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१९.१३, संहिता ! ‘वा॒वृ॒तुः’)। परोक्षायामिति किमर्थम् । ‘लाल॑पीति’ (पद-संहिता, अ.वे. ६.१११.१)। ‘रार॑जीति’ (पद-संहिता, अ.वे. ६.७१.२)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका589 ‘अभ्यासस्य च दीर्घत्वं दीर्घोऽकितेति दृश्यते । न(H: त) तस्येष्टा समापत्तिर्लालपीति निदर्शनम् ॥ यद्यभ्यासस्य दीर्घत्वं तु(H: नु)जादीनां च यङ्लु(H: ल)कोः । सव(H: र्व)र्णे च परोक्षायां न समापद्य(H: द्ये)ते क्व(H: क)चित् ॥’ (source?) Note: Concerning the verses quoted in the commentary, Whitney says: “I have not succeeded in amending the text so as to be able to translate the whole passage.” Now we can make sense of these verses without any major difficulties. The segment दीर्घोऽकितेति refers to Pāṇini 7.4.83 (दीर्घोऽकितः) which pre- scribes lengthening of the reduplication of the root in intensive forms like lālapīti. What Whitney read as नुजादीनाम् in the manuscript H, needs to be amended to तुजादीनाम्, and refers to Pāṇini 6.1.7 (तुजादीनां दीर्घोऽभ्यासस्य) which prescribes lengthening of the reduplication of the root in forms like tūtujānaḥ. The expression which the manuscript and Whitney read as यङ्लकोः clearly stands for यङ्लुकोः. This expression refers to the affix yaṄ prescribed by Pāṇini in forms like lālapyate, and its deletion (luk) in forms like lālapīti. Lengthening of the reduplication of the root in such forms is prescribed by Pāṇini 7.4.83 cited above. The segment सवर्णे च परोक्षायाम् also refers to Pāṇini 6.4.78 (अभ्यासस्यासवर्णे). This rule says that a reduplication of a root which ends in i or u, followed by a non-homogeneous vowel, has these sounds substituted by iyaṄ and uvaṄ respectively. Thus, in the example uvokha, the reduplica- tion u is changed to uv, before okha. On the other hand, in the form ūkhatuḥ, the reduplication u is followed by ukh+ atuḥ. Since, the u is followed by a savarṇa “homogeneous” vowel, it is not replaced by uv, but is combined with the following u to yield a long ū. The verse cited by the commentary refers to such forms and says that the long vowels in such forms are not to be restored to short vowels in their Pada form. Thus, the verse is no longer enigmatic. Also compare the examples listed under CA (3.1.13: अकारस्याभ्यासस्य बहुलम्) and APR (209, pp. 126-7). Restorations of this kind for the Kramapāṭha are now confirmed by the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. Folio 57 offers an instance from AV (20.73.6): तवि॑षीं वावृधे । वा॒वृ॒धे॒ शवः॑ । व॒वृ॒ध॒ इति॑ ववृधे.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 590 ४.३.१३. वावृधानप्रभृतीनां च । Whitney (4.85). Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original shapes of reduplications] also in forms such as vāvr̥dhāna. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वावृधानप्रभृतीनां च षत्वादीनां समा- पत्तिर्भवति। ‘ववृधानःऽइव’ (not in AV)। ‘स॒स॒हि[ः]’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१८.५, संहिता ! ‘सा॒स॒हिः’)। ‘व॒वृ॒धा॒नः’ (पद, अ.वे. १.८.४, संहिता ! ‘वा॒वृ॒धा॒नः’)। Note: The passage vāvr̥dhāna iva cited by the CAB is not found in the Vulgate of the AV, and Surya Kanta (APR, Introduction, p. 40) suggests that this may have occurred in the genuine Śaunakīya recension of the AV, and that the Vulgate is not the genuine Śaunakīya recension. About the gaṇa referred to in the rule, Whitney says: “The gaṇa might be filled up from the material collected and presented in the notes to the first section of the third chapter, but I have no taken the trouble to put it together, as it is uncertain how much and what the authors of the treatise meant the precept to cover.” Unfortunately, no such gaṇa is collected in the APR either, and hence we are unable to determine its exact membership. However, note that the APR (209, pp. 126-127) lists the examples sāsahānaḥ (AV 3.6.4, pada = sasahānaḥ) and sāsahim (AV 3.21.3, pada = sasahim). Curiously, the passage in which the form sāsahānaḥ occurs is sāsahānaḥ iva, and one wonders whether the unattested vāvr̥dhānaḥ iva of the CAB is simply an error for an original sāsahānaḥ iva. Restorations of this kind for the Kramapāṭha are now confirmed by the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. Folio 7 offers an instance from AV (20.11.1): त॒न्वा॑ वावृधा॒नः । वा॒वृ॒धा॒नो भूरि॑दात्रः । व॒वृ॒धा॒न इति॑ व॒वृ॒धा॒नः. The accent-marking in the repetition is somewhat peculiar, but not uncommon. The restoration of sāsahiḥ in the Kramapāṭha is also found on folio 17 in AV (20.19.6): वाजे॑षु सास॒हिः । सा॒स॒हिर्भ॑व । स॒स॒हिरिति॑ स॒स॒हिः. ४.३.१४. कृपिरुपिरिषीणामनह्वानाम् । Whitney (4.86). A, B, C, D, J, O: °ऋषीणा°. P: °रुषी°.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका591 Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowel for the long vowel ap- pearing in the reduplications of the roots] kr̥p, rup, and riṣ, in the augmentless [aorist injunctive, anahva = anaṭka?, forms]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - कृपिरुपिसंसः(?)। ‘न । रु॒रु॒पः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.७.३, ५-६, संहिता ! ‘रू॒रु॒पः॒’)। ‘एन॑सः । दे॒व॒। रि॒रि॒षः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.५१.३, संहिता ! ‘री॒रि॒षः॒’)। ‘मा। नः॒ । रि॒रि॒षः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.३.८, संहिता ! ‘री॒रि॒षः॒’)। अनह्वानामिति किमर्थम् । ‘न। अ॒मी॒म॒दः॒ । न। अ॒रू॒रु॒पः॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.६.३)। [H also adds: ‘मा । रि॒रि॒षः॒। नः’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.२.२९, संहिता ! ‘री॒रि॒षः॒’?)]। ‘सि॒नी॒वा॒ली । अ॒[ची॒]कॢ॒प॒त्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६. ११.३)। Note: The explanatory paraphrase of the rule is missing from the manuscript of the commentary, and it is not clear what the term anahva stands for. Looking at the instances cited in the commentary, Whitney suggests that, “so far as these instances go, anahva might be understood as designating an aorist form which has lost its accent; or virtually, an aorist subjunctive.” K.V Abhyankar and J.M. Shukla (1977: 19) refer to our CA rule, but mistakenly explain the term anahva as “a tech. term used by the authors of the Prātiśākhya works for frequentative formations such as rīriṣaḥ, cākl̥pat etc.” These forms are not frequentative forms. They are augmentless aorists, or aorist injunctives. Renou (1942: 364) refers to Weber’s suggestion that anahva may be a misreading for anaṭka, meaning ‘dépourvu d’augment.’ Pāṇini (6.4.71: लुङ्लङ्ऌङ्ष्वडुदात्तः) uses the term aṬ to refer to the past tense augment in imper- fect and aorist forms, and says that this augment is dropped if these forms are used in conjunction with mā, or even otherwise in Vedic, cf. P.6.4.74 (न माङ््योगे) and P.6.4.75 (बहुलं छन्दस्यमाङ््योगेऽपि). This is how Pāṇini accounts for what modern scholars refer to as aorist injunctive. Thus, the term anaṭka could easily refer to an augmentless aorist, or better, as Whitney recognizes, an aorist subjunctive, an injunctive in modern terminology. The counter-examples of the commentary then make sense, because they are examples of augment-retaining

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 592 aorists. The vertical Devanagari cluster for ṭka (= ट्व)could have been easily misread as hva (ह्व). For the intruding mā rīriṣaḥ naḥ AV (11.2.29), the VVRI Pada reading is ririṣaḥ. However, it is not clear why this example is cited by the commen- tary. Whitney rightly criticizes the commentator and says: “this is, however, no counter-example, but precisely analogous with the two already cited for the same word.” Once we take this example out, the term anaṭka becomes applica- ble to the remaining counter-examples. We should, however, note that if anahva is a copyist’s error for anaṭka, it must have been a very ancient error going all the way back to the archetype of all our available manuscripts. Concerning another matter, Whitney says: “The text (of AV) affords one other word, śuśucaḥ (xviii.2.4: s. śūśucaḥ), of the same class with those treated in this rule. Its omission must be understood as signifying, either that the verse containing it was not in the Atharvan text of the authors and com- mentator of our Prātiśākhya, or that their text read, with the Rig-Veda (x.16.1), śocaḥ, or, finally, that the word escaped their notice.” Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 833) further informs us: “Our Bp. appears to give in a śuśucaḥ, as it ∀apparently# ought to do according to Prāt. iv. 86 (= CA 4.3.14), though the example is not quoted in the comment on that rule; but the other pada-mss. ∀and SPP.# have śūśucaḥ.” As far as the examples cited by the commentator are concerned, there is some variation in the manuscripts and editions. For AV (4.7.3), the VVRI edition offers the Padapāṭha reading rūrupaḥ, but mentions rurupaḥ as a manu- script variant. For AV (6.51.3), it offers the Pada reading rīriṣaḥ, without noting any manuscript variants. On AV (4.6.3), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol.I., p. 155) says: “The construction of the augmentless aorist-form rūrupas with ná instead of mā́ is against all rule and usage; the easiest emendation would be to nā́rūrupas; Ppp. gives na rūrūpaḥ. SPP. unaccountably reads rūrupaḥ in pada- text, both here and in 5d, and 6d, against all but one of his pada-mss. in this verse, and also against Prāt. iv.86 (= CA 4.3.14), which distinctly requires rurupaḥ; and (in all three cases alike) the pada-mss. add after the word the sign which they are accustomed to use when a pada-reading is to be changed to something else in saṃhitā.” It is to be noted that the pada-reading for AV (4.6.3) given by the CAB in fact completely supports Whitney’s suggested emendation. The examples rūrupaḥ and rīriṣaḥ are listed under APR (212, p. 129) as examples of lengthening, and seem to belong to the nārakādigaṇa, referred to in CA (3.1.21: nārakādīnām prathamasya). However, the nārakādigaṇa as found

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका593 in APR (212, pp. 129-130) lists no form of kr̥p in this category. No example of kr̥p is offered by the CAB either. Whitney comments: “For the root kr̥p, either the commentator furnished no instances, or the manuscript has omitted them : the only derivative of that root, so far as I can discover, which the rule can have any concern with, is cākl̥pat (vi.35.3 : p. cakl̥pat); since cakl̥puḥ and cakl̥pe would properly fall under rule 84 (= CA 4.3.12).” All the three forms are, however, listed by the APR under APR (209, pp. 126-127), and not as part of the nārakādigaṇa. Given the demonstrable dependence of the CAB on the APR, the dislocation of these examples in the APR may have led the CAB to not citing any example here for the root kr̥p/kl̥p. ४.३.१५. जीहीडाहम् । Whitney (4.87). Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowel for the long vowel ap- pearing in the reduplication in the form] jīhīḍa [in jīhīḍāham, AV 4.32.5]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - जीहीडाहमिति च समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘अ॒क्र॒तुः । जि॒ही॒ड॒ । अ॒हम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३२.५, संहिता ! ‘जी॒ही॒डा॒हम्’)। Note: The VVRI edition gives जिहीडाहम् for the Saṃhitā, but offers the manuscript variant जीहीडाहम्. Whitney’s edition also offers जिहीडाहम् as the Saṃhitā reading. This change in the AV reading may have occurred under the influence of the RV tradition. The RV (10.83.5) reads: जिहीळाहम्. For further discussion, see Note on CA (3.1.14). The APR (209, pp. 126-127) lists this form as a case of lengthening of the reduplication in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. ४.३.१६. साह्याम । Whitney (4.88). B, C, D, H, P: सह्याम. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowel of the root in the form] sāhyāma.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 594 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स(ा?)ह्यामेति च समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘स॒ह्याम॑। दास॑म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.३२.१, संहिता ! ‘सा॒ह्याम॑’)। ‘सह्यामेति(H: ज्ञि) च(H: य) सहेः दीर्घत्वं यद् दृश्यते । न तस्येष्टा समापत्तिर् या(H: यः)शब्दो दीर्घ एव सः ॥ आख्यातेऽन्तःपदे ह्रस्वो न समापद्यते पुनः ।’ (source?) Note: Whitney cites the text of the quoted verses without any com- ment. The verse warns against mistakenly reinstating a short vowel for the long ā in yā of sahyāma. It says that such a reinstatement of yā to ya, yielding the form sahyama, is not desirable. ४.३.१७. दीदायत् । Whitney (4.89). Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowels in the second syllable of words like] dīdāyat. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीदायदिति च समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘दी॒द॒य॒त्’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.८.३, संहिता ! ‘दी॒दा॒य॒त्’)। ‘उ॒षसः॑ । वी॒रऽव॑तीः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१६.७, संहिता ! ‘उ॒षासः॑’)। ‘उ॒षसा॒नक्ता॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१२.६, संहिता ! ‘उ॒षासा॒नक्ता॑’)। Note: Whitney appropriately says that this rule refers to a Gaṇa, and that ideally it should have been worded: dīdāyādīnām. Compare CA 3.1.22 (दीदायादीनां द्वितीयस्य). However, no manuscript supports the reading dīdāyādīnām. The commentary here cites the same examples as are cited under

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका595 CA (3.1.22), clearly suggesting that by the present rule, it recognizes the same gaṇa as referred to in CA (3.1.22). CA (3.1.22) teaches the reverse doctrine that the second syllable of words like dīdāyat, read as dīdayat in the Padapāṭha), should be lengthened in the Saṃhitāpāṭha. The present rule teaches the reinstatement of the short vowel in the Padapāṭha. Also see the Note on CA (3.1.22). ४.३.१८. नारकादीनाम् । Whitney (4.90). Hac, I, J, M: तार°. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correction. Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowels for the first syllables] of words such as nāraka. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - नारकादीनां च समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘नर॑कम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.४.३६, संहिता ! ‘नार॑कम्’)। ‘सद॑नम्’ (पद, अ.वे. २.१२.७, संहिता ! ‘साद॑नम्’)। ‘अस॑तः । इ॒न्द्र॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ८.४.८, संहिता ! ‘आस॑त इन्द्र’)। Note: Compare CA 3.1.21 (नारकादीनां प्रथमस्य). The gaṇa referred to in this rule is listed under APR (212), though it is clear that the intended member- ship of this gaṇa could not be completely identical for the CA and the APR, because for a large number of words included in the nārakādigaṇa in the APR (212), the CA has independent rules. For the details, see the Note on CA (3.1.21). ४.३.१९. च्यावयतेः कारितान्तस्य । Whitney (4.91). A, F, Hab, J: व्यावयतेः°. Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowel] of the root cyu ending in a causative affix.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 596 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - च्यावयतेः कारितान्तस्य णिजन्तस्य समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘आ । च्य॒व॒य॒न्तु॒ । स॒ख्याय॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.३.२, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒व॒य॒न्तु॒’)। ‘यथा॑ । वातः॑ । च्य॒व- य॑ति’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.१.१३, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒वय॑ति’)। ‘अङ्गा॑त्ऽअङ्गात् । प्र । च्य॒व॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.४.२५, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒व॒य॒’)। ‘च्य॒वय॑न् । च॒ । वृ॒क्षान्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.१.५१, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒वय॑न्’)। ‘दे॒वताः॑ । च्य॒व॒य॒न्तु॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.३.३५, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒व॒- य॒न्तु॒’)। ‘पू॒षा । त्वा॒ । इ॒तः । च्य॒व॒य॒तु॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.२.५४, संहिता ! ‘च्या॒व॒य॒तु॒’)। Note: Whitney points out that these are all the cases which the text of the Atharvaveda furnishes. All the examples cited by the CAB are found in the same order under APR (212). Restorations of this kind for the Kramapāṭha are now confirmed by the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. Folio 37 offers an instance from AV (20.37.1): कृ॒ष्टीश्च्या॒वय॑ति । … च्य॒वय॒तीति॑ च्य॒वय॑ति. Folio 64 offers another instance from AV (20.89.2) आ च्या॑वय । च्या॒व॒य॒ म॒घ॒देया॑य । च्य॒व॒येति॑ च्यवय. Also note the use of the Pāṇinian term ṇic by the CAB. ४.३.२०. यावयतेराख्याते । Whitney (4.92). Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowel] in the finite verb forms of the root yu. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यावयतेराख्यातप्रत्यये परतः समापत्ति- र्भवति । ‘वरी॑यः । य॒व॒य॒ । व॒धम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२०.३, संहिता ! ‘या॒व॒या॒’)। ‘अ॒स्मत् । य॒व॒य॒त॒म्’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२०.२, संहिता ! ‘या॒व॒य॒त॒म्’)। ‘व॒रु॒ण॒ । य॒व॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२०.३, संहिता ! ‘या॒व॒य॒’)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका597 Note: The examples cited by the CAB are found listed under APR (212). About the condition ākhyāte in the rule, Whitney says: “He (= the commentator) does not explain the meaning of the restriction ākhyāte added to the rule, nor cite any counter-example. I can discover no other reason for it than the occurrence of the word yavayāvānaḥ, at ix.2.13 : this may have been deemed by the authors of the treatise to contain the causative (kāritānta) aya, and therefore to require the rule to be so framed as to exclude it. But the word is divided by the pada-text yava-yāvānaḥ, as if composed of yava and yāvan, from yā : and this seems the best account to be given of it.” This form is not listed by the APR (212, pp. 129-130) among other forms of yu which are the appropriate positive examples for our present rule. However, the APR (147, 7j, p. 106) clearly lists as exception to reinstatement of the original short vowel for the long vowel of the saṃhitā (दीर्घत्वसमापत्तेरपवादः) the following examples: śapatha-yā́vanīm (AV 4.17.2) and yava-yā́vānaḥ (AV 9.2.13). Here, we do not get reinstatement to yávanīm and yávānaḥ. Thus, Whitney’s guess turns out to be absolutely correct. ४.३.२१. वनियमिश्रथिग्लपीनाम् । Whitney (4.93): °ग्लापि. A, B, D, J, M, P: no such rule. O: वनी°. Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original short vowels in the forms] of the roots van, yam, śrath, and glap. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वनियमिश्रथिग्ल(ा)पि तेषां समापत्ति- र्भवति । वनि । ‘अ॒मूम् । सम् । व॒न॒य॒न्तु॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.९.३, संहिता ! ‘वा॒न॒य॒न्तु॒’)। वनि यमि । ‘वि । मध्य॑म् । य॒म॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१३७.३, संहिता ! ‘या॒म॒य॒’)। यमि श्रथि । ‘म॒ध्य॒मम् । श्र॒थ॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ७. ८३.३, VVRI edn.: ७.८८.३ संहिता ! ‘श्र॒था॒य॒’)। श्रथि ग्लपि । ‘ई॒म् । अव॑ । ग्ल॒प॒य॒न्त॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.९.१०, संहिता ! ‘ग्ला॒प॒य॒न्त॒’)। Note: All the examples cited by the CAB are found under APR (212) except for the example of śrath which is found under APR (213).

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 598 Whitney’s reading for this rule, based on his lone manuscript H, was: vani-yami-śrathi-glāpi. However, he says: “The form of our rule 93 (= CA 4.3.21), it may be remarked, is somewhat unusual: we should expect at the end of it the genitive plural ending: thus, °glāpīnām.” Whitney’s expectation is supported by all the other manuscripts which contain this rule. ४.३.२२. इङ्ग्यवच्च । Whitney: no such rule. A, B, C, D, P: इग्य°. Translation: [There is reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original forms for compound-expressions] which contain components separable with an avagraha (iṅgya = avagr̥hyamāṇa). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इङ्ग्यवच्च ।… missing commentary. Note: Just working with the defective manuscript H, Whitney says: “The manuscript contains no final repetition of this rule (= CA 4.3.21), but offers, after the last citation, the words iṅgyavac ca. What to make of these words I do not precisely know: they may be part of a cited verse, of which the rest, along with the repetition of the rule, is lost; or they may possibly belong to an omitted rule: but I can hardly suppose the latter to be the case, not seeing what the meaning of the phrase should be, as a rule or a part of one.” Obviously, Whitney was wrong. This is a rule and this fact is sup- ported by most manuscripts. Unfortunately, the commentary on this rule is missing. Even after finding this rule in the second manuscript, Whitney (1880: 169) says: “The words iṅgyavac ca are in fact found in B. as the next rule; but, in the absence of a comment and illustrations to show what is the meaning, I do not venture to attempt the interpretation of a phrase so indefinite.” Besides this rule, the term iṅgya appears in CA 4.3.4 (इङ्ग्यानाम्) and the related term aniṅga, which should perhaps be read as aniṅgya, is found in rule CA 4.1.34 (अनिङ्गेन पूर्वेण). The commentary CAB on CA 4.3.4 renders the term iṅgya by avagr̥hyamāṇa and the term refers to forms which undergo division, or separation by avagraha. CA 4.3.4 says that restoration of pre-change forms is made only in such compounds which are resolved into their constituent ele- ments in the Padapāṭha. One wonders whether CA 4.3.4 applies to restoration in the Padapāṭha, and whether an extension of the same restoration of iṅgya words to Kramapāṭha is enjoined by the present rule iṅgyavac ca. Perhaps, this

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका599 rule was necessary, so that a prohibition of samāpatti for aṣṭan etc. could be taught by the next rule precisely for separable compounds of various kinds in the following rules. ४.३.२३. नाष्टनः । Whitney (4.94). O: नार्ष्टनः. P adds a daṇḍa after this rule as a correc- tion. Translation: [There is] no [reinstatement] of aṣṭan [i.e. of aṣṭā to aṣṭa, in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - न अष्टनः समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘अ॒ष्टा- प॑दी चतुर॒क्षी’ (अ.वे. ५.१९.७, पद ! ‘अ॒ष्टाऽप॑दी’)। ‘अ॒ष्टाऽयो॑निः’ (अ.वे. ८.९.२१, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टा- यो॑निः’?)। ‘अ॒ष्टाऽप॑क्षाम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.३.२१, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टाप॑क्षाम्’)। ‘अष्टाऽपर्णः’ (not in AV)। ‘अ॒ष्टा॒ऽ- यो॒गैः’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.९१.१, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टा॒यो॒गैः’)। ‘अ॒ष्टाऽप॑दी’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१९.७, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टाप॑दी’)। ‘अष्टाऽदंष्ट्रः’ (not in AV)। ‘अ॒ष्टाऽच॑क्रा । नव॑ऽद्वारा’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.२.३१, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टा- च॑क्रा’)। ‘अ॒ष्टाऽच॑क्रम् । व॒र्त॒ते॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ११.४.२२, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ष्टाच॑क्रम्’)। Note: Concerning the example aṣṭā-yoniḥ cited by the commentator, Whitney says that this is a blunder “for the word is read with a short vowel in both pada and saṃhitā in our Atharvan manuscripts, nor is yoni mentioned (iii.2 = CA 3.1.2) by the Prātiśākhya among words before which the final vowel of the numeral is made long.” The same reading is exhibited by the VVRI edition. There are indeed no manuscript variants cited which agree with the reading as given by the CAB. Such instances may perhaps reflect a process of analogical extension of this lengthening in certain recitational tradi- tions which instinctively made this change, without realizing that there was no authority for such a change in the Prātiśākhya.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 600 Whitney comments: “He (= the commentator) also interposes, between the first and third examples, aṣṭā-yoniḥ; but this is a blunder, for the word is read with a short vowel in both pada and saṃhitā (viii.9.21), in our Atharvan manuscripts, nor is yoni mentioned (iii.2 = CA 3.1.2) by the Prātiśākhya among words before which the final vowel of the numeral is made long.” It should also be noted that the examples aṣṭāyoniḥ, aṣṭāparṇaḥ, and aṣṭādaṃṣṭraḥ are not found in the corresponding list of examples in the APR (147b). The rest of the examples are found in the APR (147b) exactly in the same order. It is possible that the additional examples found in the CAB are a later addition to an old list. The APR (147b: aṣṭanaḥ) also seems to be directly referring to our present rule. Also, see the Note on CA (3.1.2). ४.३.२४. हिनोतेः । Whitney (4.95). Translation: [There is no reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of ṇ to n in the forms] of the root hi. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - हिनोतेश्च न समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘प्रतिऽ- प्रहिण्मः’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.१.५, संहिता ! ‘प्रति- प्रहिण्मः’)। ‘प्र । हि॒णो॒मि॒ । दू॒रम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १२.२.४, संहिता ! ‘प्र हि॑णोमि’)। ‘प्र । हि॒णु॒त॒(H: ताम्) । पि॒तॄन्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.४.४०, संहिता ! ‘प्र हि॑णुत’)। Note: I agree with Whitney’s statement that the Pada usage as regards the forms pra / hiṇomi and pra / hiṇuta is quite anomalous. He further says: “I can only conjecture that it may have been adopted in order to mark the euphonic alteration as itself of anomalous and exceptional character: there being, so far as I have been able to find, no other cases in which a preposition lingualizes the nasal of a conjugational sign.” The exceptional character of such changes is noted by Pāṇini in his rules P.8.4.15 (हिनुमीना) and P.8.4.16 (आनि लोट्). The change is exceptional on two counts. First, it occurs when the cause of this change is in a separate uncompounded word (असमासेऽपि, in P. 8.4.14). Second, the n undergoing this change does not belong to the root, but to the affix. Thus, it is possible, as Whitney suggests, that the Padapāṭha marked this exceptional nature by proposing to maintain the retroflexion of n

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका601 even in the Pada version, where theoretically there is no phonological motiva- tion for such a change. APR (147c) directly refers to our present rule, and the examples cited under APR (147c, p. 100) are identical with those cited by the CAB. ४.३.२५. बोधप्रतीबोधौ केसरप्राबन्धाया अभ्यघायन्ति पनिष्पदाति- ष्ठिपं दाधार जागार मीमायेति । Whitney (4.96). E, F, O, P: °प्राबंधायां°. A, B, D: °अभ्यच्चायंति°. O: daṇḍa after °प्राबंधायां°. O, P: °तिष्टिपं°. P(orig) adds a daṇḍa after °बोधप्रतीबोधौ°, and adds daṇḍas after °केसरप्राबंधायां° and at the end of the rule as corrections. Translation: [There is no reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original forms of the following words]: bodhapratībodhau, kesaraprābandhāyāḥ, abhyaghāyanti, paniṣ- padā, atiṣṭhipam, dādhāra, jāgāra, and mīmāya. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - बोधप्रतीबोधौ केसरप्राबन्धाया अभ्य- घायन्ति पनिष्पदातिष्ठिपम् दाधार जागार मीमायेति न समापत्तिर्भवति । ‘बो॒ध॒ऽप्र॒ती॒बो॒धौ’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.३०.१०, संहिता ! ‘बो॒ध॒प्र॒ती॒बो॒धौ’)। ‘केस॑रऽप्राबन्धायाः’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१८.११, संहिता ! ‘केस॑रप्राबन्धायाः’)। ‘अ॒भि॒ऽ- अ॒घा॒यन्ति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.६.९, संहिता ! ‘अ॒भ्य॒- घा॒य॒न्ति’)। ‘प॒नि॒ष्प॒दा’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.३०.१६, संहिता ! ‘प॒नि॒ष्प॒दा’)। ‘अ॒ति॒ष्ठि॒प॒म्’ (पद, अ.वे. ७.९५.२, VVRI edn.: ७.१००.२, संहिता ! ‘अ॒ति॒ष्ठि॒प॒म्’)। ‘दा॒धा॒र॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२.७, संहिता ! ‘दा॒धा॒र॒’)। ‘जा॒गा॒र॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.१९.१०, संहिता ! ‘जा॒गा॒र॒’)। ‘मी॒मा॒य॒’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.११.३, संहिता ! ‘मी॒मा॒य॒’)। Note: Without this rule, we may have had the undesired forms with reinstatements of ‘original’ features such as: pratibodhau, kesaraprāban- dhāyāḥ, aghayanti, paniḥpadā, atisthipam, dadhāra, jagāra, and mimāya. These unreinstated forms are ‘original’ only in the sense that they represent prior

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 602 states in a grammatical derivation. A rule like this shows that, even when the Padapāṭha is identical with the Saṃhitāpāṭha, the ancient Indian grammarians knew the notion of a sequential grammatical derivation of a word passing through various stages of morphophonemic changes. It is also the case in some of these forms, that the ‘original’ form implied is closer to the form as found in the classical language. However, this is not always the case. The APR (147d) seems to be quoting the whole of our present rule and the CAB quotes all the same examples which are cited in the APR in the same order. For the last instance, however, note that AV (9.10.21, VVRI edn. 9.15.21: gaur in mimāya …) offers mimāya in both the Saṃhitā and Padapāṭha. As this verse is a variant of the RV (1.164.41: gaurīr mimāya …), it is likely that an earlier mīmāya was altered to mimāya under the influence of the R̥gvedic tradition. Most probably, the reading of AV (9.10.21) known to the author of the CA was mīmāya. Whitney further points out: “Of the class of the first three cases is sam- niṣadya (iv.16.2), which equally calls for inclusion in this rule, unless the reading in our pada manuscript is a copyist’s error, and should be amended to sam-nisadya.” The APR (147) does not include this case among those where reinstatement of the original is prohibited. The Padapāṭha in the VVRI edition reads sam-niṣadya, and no manuscript variants are mentioned.. ४.३.२६. प्रपणः पणतेरेव । Whitney (4.97). Ha: प्रयणः°. Translation: [There is no reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of ṇ by n in the form] prapaṇa, only if it is derived from the root paṇ. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रपण इति पणतेरेव(H: परतैरक) समापत्तिर्न भवति । ‘येन॑ । धने॑न । प्र॒ऽप॒णं । चरा॑मि’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१५.५, संहिता ! ‘प्र॒प॒णम्’)। ‘शु॒नम् । नः॒ । अ॒स्तु॒ । प्र॒ऽप॒णः’ (पद, अ.वे. ३.१५.४, संहिता ! ‘प्र॒प॒णः’)। Note: Referring to the reading of the commentary in H, Whitney says: “In his paraphrase, the commentator says prapaṇa iti paratairaka samā- pattir na bhavati; but what paratairaka is, I do not know.” My own best guess

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका603 is that paratairaka is a corruption by the copyist of the phrase paṇatereva. My guess is based on the following reasoning. In a sequence such as paṇatereva, the initial part of ṇ [perhaps originally written in a way similar to the North Indian Nagari ण] was read as r, and the remaining part was read as a Pr̥ṣṭha- mātrā for the next syllable, i.e. te. This syllable te with an added Pr̥ṣṭhamātrā was then interpreted as tai. Finally, the reva was miscopied as raka. Again, referring to the commentary on this rule in the manuscript H, Whitney says: “Its (=of the rule) repetition before the one next following is wanting in the manuscript: possibly, then (as in the case of rule 81 = CA 4.3.19, above), we have lost something in the way of exposition or illustration which would have farther enlightened us.” My photocopy of the same manu- script which was hand-copied by Whitney clearly shows the final repetition of this rule, and this is one of those cases where Whitney missed something while hand-copying the text from the Berlin manuscript, H. ४.३.२७. इदमूष्वादिषु त्रिपदत्वात् । Whitney (4.98), J: इदमूष्वादिषु पदत्वात्. A, B, D, Hc, J, M, P: °तृपदत्वात्. O: °त्रिपादत्वात्. Translation: [There is no reinstatement of in the Kramapāṭha of the original words in sequences such as] idam ū ṣu, because [in the Kramapāṭha] these three words are combined into a single unit [= tripada]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - इदमूष्वादिषु त्रिपदत्वान्न समापत्ति- र्भवति । ‘इ॒दमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १.२४.४, क्रमपद ! ‘इ॒दमू॒ षु’)। ‘तदू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.१.५, क्रमपद ! ‘तदू॒ षु’)। ‘पर्यू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ५.६.४, क्रमपद ! ‘पर्यू॒ षु’)। ‘म॒हीमू॒ षु’ (अ.वे. ७.६.२, क्रमपद ! ‘म॒हीमू॒ षु’)। ‘अ॒न्य ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.१६, क्रमपद ! ‘अ॒न्य ऊ॒ षु’)। ‘स्तु॒ष ऊ॒ षु’ (अ.वे. १८.१.३७, क्रमपद ! ‘स्तु॒ष ऊ॒ षु’)। Note: Whitney is not correct in saying that “the commentator para- phrases padatvāt by tripadatvāt.” All the manuscript evidence, including the manuscript H, supports the reading of the rule given above as: idam ūṣvādiṣu tripadatvāt. Whitney is, however, correct in saying that the rule applies only to

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 604 the krama- text, and that the pada reading of the passages referred to does not deviate in any manner from the usual norm: we have idam : ūn̐ iti : su, etc. The term tripada refers to those kramapadas which, by rule 113 = CA (4.4.14), below, are composed of three words, instead of, as usual, two only. For AV (18.1.16), Whitney’s edition agrees with the reading given in the CAB. However, the VVRI edition gives the reading anyam ū ṣu, while noting the manuscript variant anya ū ṣu. It should be noted that the reading anyam ū ṣu is identical with the reading found in RV (10.10.14). Thus, one can surmise that the deviation from the reading given by the CA tradition may have come about through the influence of the R̥gvedic tradition. All these ex- amples are cited in the same order in APR (207a, p. 124), and the APR reading for AV (18.1.16) agrees with the one found in the CAB. The APR (207a) has one more passage which is not cited by the CAB : pará ū ta ékam (AV 18.3.7), and we do not know whether this passage was intended to be included in this gaṇa by the CA and the CAB. Also see the Note on CA (3.1.4). ४.३.२८. ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम् । Whitney (4.99). O: म्ह for ह्म. Translation: [There is no reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original n for ṇ in forms] such as bráhmaṇvatī. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनां च न समापत्तिर्भ- वति। ‘ब्रह्म॑ण्ऽवतीम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.१०८.२, संहिता ! ‘ब्रह्म॑ण्वतीम्’)। ‘पश्य॑त् । अ॒क्ष॒ण्ऽवान्’ (पद, अ.वे. ९.९.१५, संहिता ! ‘पश्य॑दक्ष॒ण्वान्’)। ‘शी॒र्ष॒ण्ऽवती॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १०.१.२, संहिता ! ‘शी॒र्ष॒ण्वती॑’)। ‘वृ॒ष॒ण्य- न्ती॑ऽइव । क॒न्यला॑’ (पद, अ.वे. ५.५.३, संहिता ! ‘वृ॒ष॒ण्यन्ती॑व क॒न्यला॑’)। Note: Whitney says: “The irregularity which renders necessary the rule is the retention of the lingual ṇ as final, against the principle of rule iii.89 (= CA 3.4.21), above. The last case cited, however, does not belong with the rest, since the denominative ending, by rule 29, above, is separable only after a vowel, and we read vr̥ṣaṇyantyāḥ (vi.9.1) and vr̥ṣaṇyataḥ (vi.70.1-3), without avagraha : hence there is no ground for restoration.”

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका605 Whitney’s reasoning about vr̥ṣaṇyantīva is correct only as far as the Padapāṭha goes. However, in the process of parihāra in the Kramapāṭha, there can be reinstatement of the original sounds, even when there is no avagraha, and this has led the commentator to include this example here. Compare the examples on CA (4.3.2). The parihāra ‘repetition with an iti interposed’ be- comes applicable to the example vr̥ṣaṇyantīva, since the tradition considers this as a divisible compound of vr̥ṣaṇyantī+iva, and such divisible compounds are subject to parihāra in the Kramapāṭha. This is not the case with the other two examples pointed out by Whitney. ४.३.२९. दीर्घायुत्वायादीनां च । Whitney (4.100), Ha, I: omit °या°. I: 30. Translation: [There is no reinstatement in the Padapāṭha and Kramapāṭha of the original forms in expressions] such as dīrghāyutva. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - दीर्घायुत्वायादीनां च न समापत्ति- र्भवति । ‘दी॒र्घा॒यु॒ऽत्वाय॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.२२.२, संहिता ! ‘दी॒र्घा॒यु॒त्वाय॑’)। ‘स॒ह॒स्र॒च॒क्षो॒ इति॑ सहस्रऽचक्षो । त्वम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ४.२०.५, संहिता ! ‘स॒ह॒स्र॒च॒क्षो॒ त्वम्’)। ‘ब॒र्हि॒ऽसदः॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.१.४५, ५१, संहिता ! ‘ब॒र्हि॒षदः॑’)। Note: The same examples are offered in the commentary on CA (2.2.20). The gaṇa referred to in this rule is also referred to in CA (2.2.20) and it has been fully listed in the APR (200). The CAB cites the first three in- stances of this gaṇa, which contains a total of 10 instances. Also see the Note on CA (2.2.20). इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः । H: ॥१०२॥ चतुर्थस्य तृतीयः पादः. E, F: चतुर्थस्य तृतीयः पादः. I: इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य तृतीयः पादः. A, B, C, D, J, M, P: तृतीयः पादः. O: इत्य. चतुर्थस्य तृतीयः पादः ॥ सूत्राणि ॥ ३० ॥.

अध्याय ४, पाद ३ 606 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - ॥१०२॥ चतुर्थस्य तृतीयः पादः ॥ Note: Referring to the cumulative count of the rules mentioned in the colophon of the manuscript H, Whitney says: “unless rule 53 is to be divided into two, or unless the copyist’s count is inaccurate, we have lost, somewhere in the course of the second and third sections, one of the rules of the text.” As Whitney was to realize after the discovery of a second manuscript: “The resto- ration of iṅgyavac ca (after rule 93), and the reckoning of the introduction to the chapter as a rule, would make out the number 102, given in A (= H) as that of the rules in the first three sections,” Whitney (1880: 169). One must, how- ever, keep in mind that other manuscripts show inclusion of the initial verses of the fourth Adhyāya as part of the text of the CA, and hence their counts are significantly different. ______________________________

॥ चतुर्थोऽध्यायः ॥ ॥ चतुर्थः पादः ॥ ४.४.१. वेदाध्ययनं धर्मः । Whitney (4.101). Translation: Study of the Veda is a merit-producing act. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - वेदाद्ध(H: ध)र्मः कर्मशेषभूतात् वेदा- द्धर्ममाहुर्याज्ञिकाः । वेदेन कर्माणि क्रियन्ते । कर्मणो धर्मः । अनेन प्रकारेण वेदाद्ध(H: ध)र्ममाहुर्याज्ञिकाः । ‘स्वर्गकामो अघायताम्’(source?) इत्यनेन मन्त्रेण शतौदनाख्यं(H: °ना- स्तख्यं) कर्म कृत्वा स्वर्गं साधयेदिति याज्ञिकाम्नानम् । ‘यज्ञततिर्न पृथग्वेदेभ्यः’ (च.आ. ४.४.४)। यज्ञस्य तति- र्यज्ञततिस्ततिर्विस्तारः । सा न पृथग्वेदेभ्यो भवति । न विना वेदैर्यज्ञस्तायते । यज्ञाद्धर्मो वेदाद्यज्ञः । एवं वेदाध्ययनाद्धर्मः । ‘वेदाध्ययनं धर्म’ (च.आ. ४.४.१) इत्यादिसूत्रम् । Note: The manuscript H here does something unusual. At the begin- ning of this Pāda, it firsts lists all the sūtras by themselves, and then it takes up each sūtra to comment. Since we do not possess the second manuscript for this portion, it is not clear why this change of pattern came about in the text. ४.४.२. प्रेत्य ज्योतिष्ट्वं कामयमानस्य । Whitney (4.102). A, B, D, Ha: प्रेत्यये°. P: °योनिष्ट्वं°. Translation: [Study of the Veda is a merit-producing act] for [a person] desiring to become a luminescent heavenly body after having gone forth [from this world after death to the world beyond].

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 608 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्र इत्य प्रकर्षेण गत्वेत्यर्थः । कुतः प्रकर्षेण गत्वा । अस्माल्लोकान्त(H: त्त, Cardona suggests: °ल्लोकाल्लोकान्त)रं गमनं प्रकर्षगमनाल्लोकान्तरं गत्वा प्रेत्य ज्योतिष्ट्वं कामयमानस्य । ज्योतिर्भावो ज्योतिष्ट्वम् । उक्तं हि ‘ये वा इह यज्ञैरार्ध्नुवंस्तेषामेतानि ज्योतींषि यान्यमूनि नक्ष- त्राणीति’ (source?)। ज्योतिर्दीप्तिभावमित्य[न]र्थान्तरम् । कथं तन्मे(H: ताम) स्यादित्येवमर्थं कामयमानस्य । ‘वेदा- ध्ययनं धर्मः’ (च.आ. ४.४.१)। वेदस्याध्ययनं धर्मः । तेन हि धर्मोऽभिव्यज्यते । धर्मो ज्योतिर्भावो भवति । किम- ध्ययनमात्रो धर्मः । नेत्युच्यते । किं तर्हि । ४.४.३. याज्ञिकैर्यथा समाम्नातम् । Whitney (4.103). O: याज्ञिकौर्यथा°. Translation: This is so, [in accordance with the textual authority] as it has been traditionally recited by the ritualists. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यज्ञमधीते यज्ञं विदुर्वा ते याज्ञिकास्ते यथा समामनन्ति वेदाध्ययना(H: नां)त्(H: त) धर्मस्तथा भवति । नाध्ययनमात्रात् । यथा समाम्नातमित्युक्तम् । आम्ना(H: त्म)नं पठनम् । कथं च याज्ञिकाः पठन्ति । ‘स्वर्गकामो अघायताम्’ (source?) इत्यने(H: न्ये)न स्वर्गं साधयेदिति । ननु कर्म एतत् । न वेदाध्ययनम् । ततः कर्मणो धर्मः न वेदाध्ययनात् । नैतदेवम् । ४.४.४. यज्ञततिर्न पृथग्वेदेभ्यः । Whitney (4.104). F, I, O: °पति° for °तति°. Translation: There can be no continuity of the sacrificial per- formances apart from [the understanding and maintenance of] the Vedas.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका609 चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यज्ञस्य ततिः यज्ञविस्तारः । सा वेदेभ्यः पृथक् न भवति । कारणे कार्योपचाराद(H: व)ने(H: ते)न वेद[ा]ध्ययनादेव धर्म इति निरवद्यं वेदा(H: देवा)- ध्ययनं धर्म इति । ४.४.५. यज्ञे पुनर्लोकाः प्रतिष्ठिताः । Whitney (4.105). J, M: °प्रतिताः. Translation: [All the three] worlds are in turn firmly estab- lished in the sacrifice. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्यौर्वियदवनिस्त्रयो लोका यज्ञे प्रति- ष्ठिताः । कथं निर्वापादिसंस्कृतं हविरङ्गुष्ठपर्वमात्रेण शक- यावत्तम्(?) अन्तर्निधनस्वाहाकारे(H: र)ण अग्नौ हुतं ज्योतिर्ध(H: ध)र्म(Whitney: धूम)भावेन परिणतं ज्योति- र्भावेन द्यौलोकं धूमभावेनान्तरिक्षं पुनर्वृष्टिभावेन परिणतं पृथिवीं यात्येवं यज्ञे लोकाः प्रतिष्ठिताः । ४.४.६. पञ्चजना लोकेषु । Whitney (4.106). Translation: The five communities of men [are firmly estab- lished] in the worlds. Note: The term pañca janāḥ most probably refers to the four Varṇas, plus those who are outside the Varṇa classification. The term has been vari- ously interpreted in the Śabdakalpadruma : a) one who is born from five great elements, b) Gandharvas, fathers, gods, Asuras, and Rākṣasas. The CAB simply interprets the word to mean ‘men.’ चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - पञ्चजना मनुष्य[ा]स्ते लोकेषु(H: लोकाः) प्रतिष्ठिताः । लोका यज्ञे प्रतिष्ठिताः । यज्ञा वेदे

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 610 प्रतिष्ठिताः । वेदाश्च धर्मशेषभूताः । धर्मा दैवतमतिदान्शत्- (?)कर्मणि शेषतां च(H: व) गच्छन्ति । ४.४.७. पदाध्ययनमन्तादिशब्दस्वरार्थज्ञानार्थम् । Whitney (4.107). A, D, M, P: °स्वरार्थं°. Translation: The study of the Padapāṭha is for the purpose of gaining understanding of the ends and initials of words, their accents and their meaning. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अभिधानाभिधेयसंबन्धे(H: धौ) अन्त- [ज्ञा]नं च पदाध्ययनमन्तरेण न भवति । अन्तज्ञा(H: र्ज्ञा)नं च पदाध्ययनमन्तरेण न सिध्यतीत्यवश्यं मन्त्रार्थज्ञानाय प(H: प्र)दान्यध्येयानि । पदानि वाधीयमानेनावश्यं संशयच्छेदाय प्रातिशाख्यमध्येयम् । इमानि च पुनः पदाध्ययनस्य प्रयो- जनानि । ‘पदाध्ययनमन्तादिशब्दस्वरार्थज्ञानार्थम्’। अन्तश्च। आदिश्च । शब्दश्च । [स्वरश्च]। अर्थश्च । अन्तादिशब्द- स्वरार्थाः । तेषां तु ज्ञानमर्थः प्रयोजनं यस्य तत्पदा- ध्ययनमन्तादिशब्दस्वरार्थज्ञानार्थम् । तत्कथम् । उ(H: व)- च्यते । शं नो देव्याः (ref: ‘शं नो॑ दे॒वीः,’ अ.वे. १.६.१) पादैरुदकाचमनं विहितम् । तन्न(H: त्र) ‘शं नो॑ दे॒वी- र॒भिष्ट॑ये’ पदाध्ययनमन्तरेण एकारान्तो ज्ञायते । अष्टका- याम् ‘ऋ॒तुभ्य॑स्त्वा’ (VVRI reading: ‘ऋ॒तुभ्य॑ष्ट्वा,’ अ.वे. ३.१०.१०) इति (H: ऋतुमभ्यस्त्येति) विग्रहमष्टौ । ‘ऋतुभ्यस्त्वा यजे’ इति ‘आर्तवेभ्यस्त्वा यज(H: त)’ इत्य- त्राकारादि न तु ज्ञायते । पदाध्ययनं विना वैदिकाः शब्दा न ज्ञायन्ते । तद्यथा । ‘अश्व॑ऽवतीम्’ (पद, अ.वे. १८.२.३१, संहिता ! ‘अश्वा॑वतीम्’), ‘स्त्रैसू॑यम्’ (पद, अ.वे. ६.११. ३, संहिता ! ‘स्त्रैषू॑यम्’) इत्येवमादयः संहितायामन्यरूपाः ‘अश्वा॑वतीम्,’ ‘स्त्रैषू॑य’मित्येवंरूपाः शब्दाः । तस्मादध्येयानि

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका611 पदानि । ब्रह्मयज्ञा(H adds ना)दि त्रैस्वर्येण विहितम् । तत्रा- पदाध्यायी पदेषु अप्रवीणः । तत्र ‘ब्र॒ह्माै॒द॒नं प॑चती’(अ.वे. ११.१.१)त्येवमादिषूदात्तश्रुत्या एकश्रुत्या तानस्वरेण अधी- यीत । यस्त(H: त्त)त्र स्वरहीनमन्त्रदोषो दृष्टः स मा भूदिति। आथर्वणेषु च कर्मसु यागवर्जितेषु मणिबन्धनादिषु यज्ञ इवेह (H: यज्ञवेहे) त्रैस्वर्ये(H: र्ग्गे)ण मन्त्रप्रयोग- मिच्छति । मन्त्रार्थश्च पदाध्ययनाद्विना न ज्ञायते । वाक्यं हि पदशो विभक्तमनुव्यनक्ति । तच्च पदाध्यायी सन्धिं च पदे छेदं तु शक्नुयाद्विभक्तम्[ °क्तुम्?]। ‘वि ह॑र (अ.वे. ५.२०. ९)’। ‘अ॒ल॒साला॑(H: त्वा)सि’ (अ.वे. ६.१६.४)। ‘यवा॒न्ने- ददा॒न्(H: त्)’ (अ.वे. ६.५०.१)। ‘ऊँ॒ इति॑’ (पद, अ.वे. १.६.४)। ‘स(H: श)म्वा॒स्नाह॑ आ॒स्य॑म्’ (अ.वे. ६.५६.३)। ‘तद्व॑स्य॒ रेतः॑’ (अ.वे. ९.४.४)। इत्येवमादिषु संहितायां च भवति । य(H, Whitney: र्य)जतीत्यत्र सां(Whitney: सं)- हितिकः स प्रकुर्यात् । तथा उदात्तस्वरितोदयेन वि[नि?]घातम् (cf. CA 3.3.21: ‘नोदात्तस्वरितपरम्’) अजानन् - ‘ये अ॒स्मा- कं॑ त॒न्व॑म्’ (अ.वे. २.३२.५)- अन्यत्रापि निहन्येत । ‘स्वा॒- द्वद्मीति॑’ (अ.वे. ५.१८.७)। अत्र च स्वरितं कुर्यात् । तथा उदात्तान्तस्य पूर्वपदस्यानुदात्ता(H: °त्तआ°)दावुत्तरपदे तत्तस्यान्तस्थापत्तौ स्वरितम्(cf. CA 3.3.9: ‘अन्तस्थापत्तावु- दात्तस्यानुदात्ते क्षैप्रः’) ‘अक्षंनर्थे जनस्यार्थे(?)’त्यन्यत्रापि त- [त्]कुर्यात् । एवमाद्यन्यत्राप्यपदाध्यायी संहितां(H: ता) विनाशयेत् । तस्मादेभिः कारणैरवश्याध्येयानि [पदानि]। किं च । Note: The above passage in the commentary is one of the most diffi- cult to restore. The lone manuscript H is bad enough, but Whitney occasion- ally faults it for his own copying errors. For example, the commentary cites the forms traisūyam (= pada ) and traiṣūyam. (= saṃhitā ). Whitney’s note on

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 612 p. 235 says: “Ms., both times, traisūyam.” The photocopy of the Berlin manu- script which I have in my possession correctly distinguishes between the two instances of the word, and Whitney’s comment could have been a result of only his own error in hand-copying the manuscript. A statement comparable to the present rule is found in APR (3): ऋषि- प्रोक्तमन्त्रादिशब्दस्वरज्ञानार्थः पदविभागः. Referring to the reading r̥tubhyas tvā in AV (3.10.10), Whitney (AV Transl. Vol. I., p. 102) says: “All the saṃhitā-mss. combine in a -bhyaṣ ṭvā, and SPP. accepts the reading in his text; ours emends to -bhyas tvā; such treatment of final as is common in Ppp., and sporadic examples of it are found among the AV. mss., but it is hardly to be tolerated in a text like ours; and the comment to Prāt. iv. 107 (= CA 4.4.7) quotes the passage as -bhyas tvā.” For a similar passage in AV (19.38.4) and its extensive discussion by Whitney, see: AV Transl. Vol.II., p. 957. ४.४.८. संहितादार्ढ्यार्थम् । Whitney, H: no such rule. A, B, D: °दाद्यार्थं°. J, M: संहितापदा°. P: °दा- ढ्यार्थं°. Translation: [The study of the Padapāṭha is] for the purpose of firmly grasping the text of the Vedic Saṃhitās. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संहितादार्ढ्यार्थं च पदान्यध्येयानि । दृढस्य भावो दार्ढ्यम् । वर्णदृढादित्वात् ष्य(H: ध्य)ञ् (cf. P.5.1.123: ‘वर्णदृढादिभ्यः ष्यञ् च’)। तत्रापदाध्यायी संहि- तायां सन्देह उत्पन्ने(H: त्ते) संशयच्छेदं न (H: च्छेदनं) कुर्यात् । यदि पदाध्ययनेन संदेहापनयो(H: °नायो) भवति, तर्हि किं क्रमाध्ययनेन । तत्राह । Note: With the lone manuscript H in his possession, Whitney was un- able to distinguish the two rules: CA 4.4.8 and CA 4.4.9. He argues that there must be only one rule, and that one rule is identical with CA 4.4.9 (= Whitney iv. 108). This is, however, proven wrong by all the manuscripts in our pos- session. Clearly, there are two rules. The first refers to the importance of studying the Padapāṭha, while the second refers to the importance of studying the Kramapāṭha. One should study the Padapāṭha in order to strengthen one’s

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका613 control over the Saṃhitā. One should study the Kramapāṭha in order to strengthen one’s control over both the Padapāṭha and the Saṃhitā. In (1880: 169), after the discovery of the second manuscript, Whitney admits that there must be two rules. He also presents a “somewhat amended” version of the text of the commentary given above. The manuscript as it stands reads: तत्रापदा- ध्यायी … संशयच्छेदनं कुर्यात्. Whitney amends it to: तत्र पदाध्यायी … संशयच्छेदनं कुर्यात्. A better way to amend it is: तत्रापदाध्यायी … संशयच्छेदं न कुर्यात्. Whitney also amends the manuscript passage वर्णदृढादित्वात् ध्यञ् directly to Pāṇini 5.1.123: वर्णदृढादिभ्यः ष्यञ् च. There is no justification to do so. The passage should be amended simply to: वर्णदृढादित्वात् ष्यञ्, and should be inter- preted as simply alluding to Pāṇini 5.1.123. ४.४.९. क्रमाध्ययनं संहितापददार्ढ्यार्थम् । Whitney (4.108). A, B, D, M: °पदाद्यार्थं. P: क्रमानां संहितापददाढ्यार्थं°. Translation: The study of the Kramapāṭha is for the purpose of firmly grasping the Saṃhitāpāṭha and the Padapāṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - संहितात्र(Whitney: च for त्र) स्वसंस्था च भवति । यवामण्ये(?)कपदद्विपदाच्च प्रगृह्यावगृह्य(H: ह्यं)सन्देहापनोदनम्। इदं वा(Whitney: चा)परं कारणं क्रमाध्ययनस्य । Note: The reading of the commentary is in part unintelligible. ४.४.१०. स्वरोपजनश्चादृष्टः पदेषु संहितायां च । Whitney (4.109). C, E, F, I, O: Daṇḍa after °दृष्टः. I: Sūtra ending in °दृष्टः numbered 10. A, B: °श्चादृष्टपदेषु°. J: Daṇḍa after °पजनश्च. P: °श्चादष्ट- पदेषु°, and adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: There is emergence of accents [in the Krama- pāṭha] which is not seen in the Padapāṭha or in the Saṃhitā- pāṭha. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - स्वरस्योपजन उत्पत्तिरदृष्टः पदकाले । स स्वरस्योपजनो भवति क्रमकाले । यथा ‘स्वा॒द्वद्मीति॑’(H:

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 614 प्री, Whitney: द्मी, अ.वे. ५.१८.७) अत्र पदेष्वन्तोदात्तोऽ- नुदात्तं स्वरितः संहितायामपि निघातः । क्रमे पुनः स्वरितः । स न(H: च) संहितायां न पदेषु दृष्टः । तस्य क्रमाध्ययन- मन्तरेण विज्ञानं न स्यात्तस्मात्क्रमोऽध्येयः । अधुना तस्य लक्षणम् । कीदृशोऽसौ क्रम इत्याह । Note: The intent of this rule seems to be to say that the Kramapāṭha has distinct accents as compared to the Padapāṭha and the Saṃhitāpāṭha. This new accent pattern emerges, because, in the Kramapāṭha, each pada is com- bined with the next pada, but this duo stands in isolation from the preceding and the following padas. Thus, the Kramapāṭha creates entirely new prosodic circumstances producing a distinct accent pattern. Whitney seems to interpret this statement somewhat differently: “That is to say – as we are doubtless to understand it – in the pada we have before us only the accent of the uncom- pounded elements; in the saṃhitā, only that of the combined phrase : how the one grows out of the other is shown by the krama, which gives everything in both its separate and combined state.” Referring to the cited example svādv àdmī́ti

(AV 5.18.7), Whitney says: “here, in pada, we have an oxytone and an unaccented syllable, which form a circumflex, while in the saṃhitā the circumflex farther suffers depres- sion (nighāta, the vikampita of our rule iii.65 = CA 3.3.16, above), and the cir- cumflex itself only appears in krama (in svādv àdmi, where the cause of de- pression of the svarita is not present).” ४.४.११. द्वे पदे क्रमपदम् । Whitney (4.110). Translation: Two [consecutive] words [combined together] form a krama-word. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - क्रमाध्ययनेऽपि प्रसिद्धे द्वे पदे संहिते एकं क्रमपदं भवति । तयोः सन्धा(H: न्ध्य)नमुपरिष्टाद्व- क्ष्यति । यथाशास्त्रमिति (ref: CA 4.4.23)।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका615 ४.४.१२. तस्यान्तेन परस्य प्रसन्धानम् । Whitney (4.111). Translation: With the final [or rather the second member of a Krama-word], the combination of the next word is made [to form the next Krama-word]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तस्य क्रमपदस्यान्तेनावसानेन परस्य पदस्य प्रसन्धानं कुर्यात् । तस्याप्यन्तेन परस्य तस्यापि परस्येत्येवं द्वे द्वे पदे प्रसन्धाय क्रमो भवति । अथ किमर्थं द्वे पदे क्रमपदमित्युक्तम् । पुनस्तस्यान्तेन परस्येत्युच्यते । यदि नोच्यते । प्रथमे द्वे पदे क्रमपदं कृत्वा तत्रापि परे तृतीयचतुर्थे तद् द्वितीयं क्रमपदं कुर्यात् । तत्रापि परे ये पञ्चषष्ठे तृतीयमित्येवं क्रमः स्यादित्येवं मा भूदित्येवमु- च्यते । तस्यान्तेनेति । तत्कथं नाम क्रमे(H: म) द्वितीये तृतीयं तृतीये चतुर्थमित्येवं प्रसन्धानं स्यादिति । तस्माद्वक्त- व्यम् । Note: Whitney says: “The term antena is explained by avasānena, ‘close, end:’ we might have rather expected the reading antyena, ‘with the last word of each krama-word as already defined.’” While Whitney’s expectation is appropriate, it is not supported by a single manuscript of the CA. However, I have translated the rule as if the word antena was synonymous with antyena. The CA seems to be using the word anta in the sense of antya in other rules as well, cf. CA (1.1.5: पदान्तः पद्यः), CA (2.1.2: पदान्तानामनुत्तमानाम् तृतीया …), CA (3.4.21: पदान्तस्पर्शयुक्तस्य), CA (4.3.9: पदान्तविकृतानाम्). As an illustration of Krama, Whitney cites the last line of the first hymn of the AV (i.1.4 c, d) and constructs its Krama: saṃ śrutena : śrutena gamemahi : gamemahi mā : mā śrutena : śrutena vi : vi rādhiṣi : rādhiṣīti rādhiṣi. Now we have at least one manuscript of Kramapāṭha (Kāṇḍa 20, ms. # 133/1879-80) and two manuscripts of Jaṭāpāṭha (Kāṇḍa 15, ms # 128/1879- 80; Kāṇḍa 17, ms # 83/1880-81) available at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. With these manuscripts, we can now confirm at least some of the features of Krama discussed by the CA and the CAB.

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 616 ४.४.१३. नान्तगतं परेण । Whitney (4.112). E, F, I, O: नांतर्गतं°. P: तांतगतं°. Translation: A word occurring at the end [of a half-verse, i.e. first two metrical feet, or at the end of a verse] is not [combined] with the following [i.e. the initial word of the third metrical foot, or the initial word of the next verse]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - अतिप्रसक्तं तस्यान्तेन परस्येति क्वचि- न्नेष्यते । तत्प्रतिषेधार्थमिदमुच्यते । नान्तगतमिति । अर्ध- र्चान्तगतं परेणार्धर्चादिना पदेन न(H: म) सन्धेयम् । द्वे पदे क्रमपदमित्युक्तम् । Note: Each verse is divided into two parts, each followed by a pause. The first pause occurs at the end of the second metrical foot, and the second pause occurs at the end of the verse. The present rule says that a Kramapada is not to be formed across a pause at either of these locations. The final word, thus occurring before a pause, undergoes a repetition (parihāra) by CA (4.4.18). This pattern is now fully confirmed by the BORI manuscript (133/1879-80) containing the Kramapāṭha for the 20th Kāṇḍa. Consider the first verse of the 20th Kāṇḍa and its Kramapāṭha provided by the manuscript on its first folio: AV (20.1.1): इन्द्र॑ त्वा वृष॒भं व॒यं सु॒ते सोमे॑ हवामहे । स पा॑हि॒ मध्वो॒ अन्ध॑सः ॥ Kramapāṭha:इन्द्र॑ त्वा । त्वा॒ वृष॒भं । वृ॒ष॒भं व॒यं । व॒यं सु॒ते । सु॒ते सोमे॑ । सोमे॑ हवामहे । ह॒वा॒म॒ह॒ इति॑ हवामहे । स पा॑हि । पा॒हि॒ मध्वः॑ । मध्वो॒ अन्ध॑सः । अन्ध॑स॒ इ॒त्यन्ध॑सः ॥ ४.४.१४. त्रीणि पदान्यपृक्तमध्यानि । Whitney (4.113). P: °दान्न्यपृ°. Translation: Three [consecutive] words, with the middle word being a single vowel, [are combined to form a single Krama-word].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका617
चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - क्वचित्त्रीणि त्रीणीष्यन्ते । तदा त्रीणि
पदान्यपृक्तमध्यानि । अपृक्तं पदं येषां मध्ये तान्यपृक्तमध्यानि।
पृक्तं मिश्रमित्यर्थः । किं च पदस्य मिश्रमुच्यते । स्वरान्तं
व्यञ्जनैर्मिश्रीयते । तत्र येषां पदानां(H: पदां) मध्यमं पदम-
व्यञ्जनमिश्रशुद्धकेवलस्वरो भवति, तानि तादृक्[ग्?]लक्षणा-
नि त्रीणि क्रमपदं भवति । ‘धि॒या । आ । इ॒हि॒’ (पद,
अ.वे. २.५.४, क्रम ! ‘धि॒येहि॑’) इति यथा । अत्र प्रयो-
जनमुच्यते । कस्मादपृक्तमध्यानि त्रीणि एवं भवति ।
Note: The term apr̥kta also occurs elsewhere in the CA, cf. CA
(1.3.10: उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य) and CA (1.3.17: निपातोऽपृक्तोऽनाकारः). See the Note
on CA (1.3.17). The commentary offers the example of the triple Krama-
word: dhiyā́+ā́+ihi (AV 2.5.4). Here, the Krama-sequence, in terms of the
previous rules might have been like: dhiyā́ (= dhiyā́+ā́)/ éhi (= ā́+ihi). The
present rule says that we are supposed to combine all the three words together
into a single Krama-word: dhiyéhi. For Whitney’s comment on dhiyéhi, see
Note on CA (3.2.15).
Whitney further remarks: “It is doubtless to point out and call attention
to this mode of treatment of the ā in the krama-text, that our Atharvan pada
manuscripts quite frequently write a figure 3 after the word which follows it :
thus, in the instance cited, the manuscript gives dhiyā : ā : ihi : 3, at i.1.2, punaḥ: ā : ihi : 3, etc.” This pattern of a Tripada in the Kramapāṭha is now confirmed by the BORI manuscript 133/1879-80. For the initial words for AV (20.4.1: अ॒यमु॑ त्वा विचर्षणे॒), the Kramapāṭha (folio 2) reads: अ॒यमु॑त्वा । ऊँ॒ इत्॑यूँ । त्वा॒ वि॒च॒र्ष॒णे॒ । Here, the first segment अ॒यमु॑त्वा is a Tripada, with the monophonic middle Pada u. ४.४.१५. एकादेशस्वरसन्धिदीर्घविनामाः प्रयोजनम् । Whitney (4.114). J, M: omit the Visarga. A, B, C: एकादश°. P: एका- देशः°. Translation: The reasons [for considering three words com- bined together as a single Krama-word as described above] are the fusion of two vowels into one, combination of vowels,

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 618 lengthening of a vowel, and the change of s to ṣ [after vowels other than a and ā]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एकादेशादीनि चत्वारि प्रयोजनानि अपृक्तमध्यस्य त्रिपदस्य तान्युच्यन्ते । ‘धि॒या । आ । इ॒हि॒’ (पद, अ.वे. २.५.४)। इत्यत्र समानाक्ष[र]स्येति (च.आ. ३.३.१९) दीर्घत्वे ति[ए?]कत्वे कृते ‘धि॒या’ इति पदम् । तस्य पदस्याकारो यः स्वर ‘इहि’ [इ]त्यादाविकारः तयोरेकारे च कृते ‘धि॒येहि॑’ इत्येकमेव पदं भवति । तस्मादित्यनेन सन्धानेन भवितव्यम्। अन्यथा क्रमपदमेव न स्यात् । तत्र ‘इह्या’ इति । ‘आ न’ इत्यत्रापि (= क्रम ! ‘इ॒ह्या । आ नः॑,’ पद ! ‘इ॒हि॒ । आ। नः॒,’ अ.वे. २.५.४)। ‘स्वरे नामिनोऽ-न्तस्था’ (च.आ. ३.२.१६) इति [इ]कारस्य स्वरसन्धिः क्रियते । ‘इ॒दम् । ऊँ॒ इति॑ । सु’ (पद, अ.वे. १. २४.४) इत्येतदप्येकं पदं मतम् । तस्य(H: स्या) च न सन्धिः । तथा हि । इद(H: ह)मूष्वादिष्वसां(H: सं)हितिकं दीर्घत्वम् । चर्चास्य त्रिपदस्य मध्यभावादिष्यते । इदमूष्वित्येवंभूतस्यैव रूपाख्यतायामवश्यं त्रिपदं वंशक्रमेण भवितव्यम्। अत्रैव अपदत्वम् । तदपि त्रिपदमध्यावयवम् । तस्मादे(H: दि)भिः कारणैः अपृक्तमध्यानि त्रिपदानि क्रमपदं भवति । Note: A good deal of the last portion of the above commentary is still unclear, though I have now given on the whole a better text than Whitney. Also, AV (2.5.4) presents a more complicated sequence: dhiyā́ / ā́ / ihi / ā́ / naḥ. It is not clear from the commentary whether it proposes to turn this sequence into two krama-words: dhiyéhi (= dhiyā́+ā́+ihi) and ihyā́naḥ (= ihi+ā́+naḥ). Whitney remarks: “For the second item, he selects the example ihi : ā : naḥ (ii.5.4) : here, if we compound ihy ā and ā naḥ, a vowel-combination (svarasandhi) is made of the i, by the rule svare nāmino ’ntasthāḥ (iii.39 = CA 3.2.16). How this vowel combination furnishes the ground for the krama- word ihy ā naḥ, he does not point out.” Similarly, referring to the example

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका619 idam ū ṣu, Whitney says: “The prologation of the u in this and similar cases would indeed seem to furnish a reason for the construction of the krama-word out of three members, since the long vowel could not properly appear if the particle were made the final of one such word and the beginning of another; but I am unable to see how the lingualization of the sibilant should have any effect in the same direction, since there would be no difficulty in reading u ṣu as a krama-word, if the u were treated in the ordinary manner.” A more detailed account of the reasons for combining three or more words into a single Krama- word is found in the XIth Paṭala of the RPR. For a confirmation of the Tripada Krama of this type from the BORI Krama manuscript, see the note on the previous rule. ४.४.१६. आकारौकारादि पुनः । Whitney (4.115). B, D, M, P: °दिषु न°. A, B, C, D, J, M, Ha, P(orig): a single rule combined with CA 4.4.17. P adds a daṇḍa after उकारः of the next rule as a correction, suggesting that the first rule was: आकारौकारादिषुनरुकारः. Translation: The ā and o [which are first treated as the mid- dle members included in a triple Krama-word] are again taken as the initial [members of a subsequent Krama-word]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - आकारौकारादिषु त्रि(H: संस्त्रि)पदे परतः प्र(H: प्रा)त्यारम्भः । स पुनरुच्यते । तद्यथा । ‘गो॒पा॒- य॒तास्माक॑म्’ (त्रिपदक्रम, अ.वे. १२.३.५५, पद ! ‘गो॒पा॒य॒त॒ । आ । अ॒स्माक॑म्’)। ‘आस्माक॑म्’ (क्रम, पद ! ‘आ । अ॒स्माक॑म्’)। तथा । ‘धि॒येहि॑’ (त्रिपदक्रम, अ.वे. २.५.४, पद ! ‘धि॒या । आ । इ॒हि॒’)। ‘एहि॑’ (क्रम, पद ! ‘आ । इ॒हि॒’)। ‘ह॒विरोषु’ (त्रिपदक्रम, अ.वे. ७.७२.२, पद ! ‘ह॒विः । ओ [इति॑] । सु’)। ‘ओ षु’ (क्रम, पद ! ‘ओ। सु’)। ‘ओ इत्यो’ (= परिहार)। Note: This behavior is now confirmed by the BORI Krama manuscript (133/1879-80). Folio 4 offers an instance from AV 20.6.2: Saṃhitā: पिबा वृ॑षस्व॒, Pada: पिब॑ । आ । वृ॒ष॒स्व॒, Krama: पिबा वृ॑षस्व । आ वृ॑षस्व.

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 620 ४.४.१७. उकारः परिहार्य एव । Whitney (4.116). B: नकारः परिहार्य एव. Translation: The [monophonic particle] u must indeed be re- peated (parihāra). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - एवम् उकारो(एवकारो?)ऽन्ययोगनिवृ- त्त्यर्थः । श्रीनारायणः (?)। अयोगनिवृत्त्यर्थष्व[ °स्त्व?]परि- हार्य एव। परिहारश्चर्चा द्विर्वचनमित्यनर्थान्तरम् । उकारो न पुनरुच्यते। किन्तु परिक्रि[ह्रि?]यते। त(H: य)द्यथा । ‘स उ॒ सूर्यः॑’ (अ.वे. १३.४.५)। ‘ऊँ॒ इत्यूँ॒ इति॑’ । ‘स उ॑ ए॒व’ (अ.वे. १३.४.५) (अ)त्र ‘ऊँ॒ इत्यूँ॒ इति॑’। Note: The wording of the commentary is not quite clear. However, Whitney says: “This rule is, as the commentator explains it, intended to forbid the combination of u (like ā and o) with the next following word to form a new krama-word (anyayoganivr̥ttyarthaḥ).” The commentary seems to be making some distinction between anyayoganivr̥tti and ayoganivr̥tti for the particle u. In technical Sanskrit, these terms are used to explain the meaning of the particle eva, and hence the first line could be emended to: evakāro ’nyayoganivr̥tty- arthaḥ. Ayoganivr̥tti may mean “obligatory combination, lit. prohibition on lack of combination.” For u in B.O.R.I. Krama ms., cf. note on CA 4.4.19. ४.४.१८. प्रगृह्यावगृह्यसमापाद्यान्तगतानां द्विर्वचनं परिहार इतिमध्ये । Whitney (4.117). A, B, D, O: °वगृह्यास°. I: °द्यानामंतर्ग°. O: °समापद्या°. P adds daṇḍas after द्विर्वचनं and मध्ये as corrections. All mss. °न्तर्गतानां°. Translation: Repetition with iti interposed [i.e. ‘x iti x’] is applied to pragr̥hyas, compound-words divisible with an ava- graha, of those requiring reinstatement of the original form, and those which occur at the end [of a half-verse, or at the end of the verse].

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका621 Note: All manuscripts have the reading antargatānāṃ, and so does the manuscript of the commentary CAB. Whitney restores it to antagatānāṃ, with- out reporting the original reading. I agree with Whitney’s restoration, since it agrees with the practice of parihāra, or parigraha as it is called in the RPR (iii.23: परिग्रहे त्वनार्षान्तात् …) and sthitopasthita as it is called in the VPR (4.190, 4.196: अवसाने च). The misreading antargata for antagata is also found in sev- eral manuscripts for CA (4.4.13: नान्तगतं परेण). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्रगृह्यं च अवगृह्यं च समापाद्यं च अन्तग(H: र्ग)तं च । प्रगृह्यावगृह्यसमापाद्यान्तग(H: र्ग)तानि चैषां प्रगृह्यादीनां द्विर्वचनं कर्तव्यम् । क्रमकाले द्विर्वक्त- व्यानि। तस्य द्विर्वचनस्य परिहार इति संज्ञा । स च इति- मध्यः परिहारः कार्यः । तयोर्द्विर्वचनयोरेकमुक्त्वा तत(H: त्) इति । ततो द्विर्वचनं । मध्ये तु प्रगृह्यादीनि । एकेन इतिना परिहार्याणि । Note: Whitney provides a comparative view of parihāra in the various traditions: “The forms to be repeated are, according to the doctrine of he Vāj. Pr. (iv.187-193), a divisible word (avagr̥hya), one in the interior of which ap- pears a prolongation or a lingualization, a pragr̥hya, a riphita of which the r does not appear in the saṃhitā, and a word preceding a pause (avasāna). The first and the last three of these classes are, indeed, treated in the same manner by all the other authorities (compare R. Pr. x.6-8, r. 7-9, and xi. 13-14, r. 25; Up(alekhasūtra) iv. 4-11); but as regards the words which in saṃhitā undergo an abnormal alteration of form, there is a less perfect agreement among them. The Rik. Pr. and Up. specify as requiring repetition in krama (but sundry spe- cial and anomalous cases), words having their initial vowel prolonged, and those in the interior of which there is a change not brought about by external influences - that is to say, due to euphonic causes within the word itself. Whether the Vāj. Pr. includes among the repeatable words those having a pro- longed initial, or whether any cases of this kind occur in the text to which it belongs, I do not know. Our own krama-system, it will be noticed, while in one respect more chary of the repetition than the others, in that it repeats no riphita words, in another respect is vastly more liberal of its use, applying it in the case of every word which requires restoration from an abnormal to a nor- mal form, according to the rules given in the preceding section of this chapter.

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 622 There is no limitation made, either by the text or the commentary, of the term samāpādya; so far as I can see, every word in the text which undergoes in saṃhitā any of the changes detailed in rule 74, above, must suffer parihāra. The Atharvan krama is thus made a more complete and elaborate index of the euphonic irregularities occurring in its text than is that of either of the other Vedas.” Note that Whitney’s conception of the Kramapāṭha for the AV is purely inferential, and is not based on either perusal of the manuscripts of the Krama- pāṭha or its actual recitation. Now the BORI Krama manuscript (133/1879-80) confirms the description given by the CA and the CAB. The parihāra is also carried out in the Jaṭāpāṭha as shown by the BORI manuscripts 128/1879-80 and 83/1880-81. ४.४.१९. द्वाभ्यामुकारः । Whitney (4.118). I: 20. O: द्वाध्यांमुकारः. Translation: [The parihāra repetition for] u [is carried out] by [placing] two [iti-s, namely one after each occurrence of u]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - द्वाभ्यामितिकरणाभ्यामुकारः परि- हार्यः। ‘ऊँ॒ इत्यूँ॒ इति॑’ यथा । किं प्रयोजनम् । सर्वाणि प्रगृह्याण्येकेनेतिनावेष्ट्यन्ते उकारस्तु द्वाभ्यामित्युच्यते । Note: Whitney points out that this exceptional treatment of u is unique to the AV tradition: “None of the other treatises supports this reading : all would prescribe simply ūn̐ ity ūn̐.” In this respect, the BORI Krama manuscript (133/1879-80) does not follow the CA prescription and uses iti only once. However, the BORI Jaṭāpāṭha manuscript (128/1879-80, folio 36- 7) shows the application of the present CA rule: ऊँ॒ इत्यूँ॒ इति॑ (AV 15.10.6-7). Since the Krama manuscript is available only for the 20th Kāṇḍa, the difference between the treatment of u, may be historically significant. The Krama of the 20th Kāṇḍa may have been influenced more by the RV tradition. The Jaṭā manuscript, however, shows that the CA rule was indeed followed. ४.४.२०. अनुनासिकदीर्घत्वं प्रयोजनम् । Whitney (4.119). B, D: अनुनासिकादी°.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका623 Translation: [The use of iti after each of the repeated occur- rences of u is] for the purpose of [maintaining] nasalization and lengthening [of u]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तस्य उकारस्य इतिपरस्य त्वनु- नासिकत्वं विहितम् ‘उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य’ (च.आ. १.३. १०) इति । तद्यदा द्वितीय इतिर्ना(H: ना)द्रियेत तदेतिपर- मनु(H: °रमंनासि°)नासिकं व्याहन्येत । तथा दीर्घत्वम् । तेनावश्यमनुनासिकदीर्घत्वव्याख्यानाय(H: °नेय) उकारो द्वा- भ्यां नित्यं परिहर्तव्यः । Note: As the commentary points out, CA (1.3.10: उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य) prescribes that the particle u is nasalized before iti. CA (1.3.11: दीर्घः प्रगृह्यश्च) further says that u is lengthened before iti and that it becomes a pragr̥hya, namely that it is not combined in sandhi with the following iti. The commen- tator says that, unless each occurrence of u in the repetition were followed with iti, it would not be possible to keep it long and nasalized, i.e. as ũ. ४.४.२१. प्लुतश्चाप्लुतवत् । Whitney (4.120). P adds a daṇḍa after this as a correction. Translation: A prolated vowel, [in parihāra repetition], is treated like a non-prolated one. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - प्लुतश्चाप्लुतवच्च परिहर्तव्यः अप्लुतेन तुल्यतां प्रावहितव्यः । परिहारकाले ‘पुरु॑षः । आ । ब॒भू॒वाँ३’ (अ.वे. १०.२.२८) अत्र ‘आ’ इत्या(H: त्य)कारः प्लुतः । सः अप्लुतवता परिहर्तव्यः । ‘आ बभूवाँ३’ इति बभूवेति वक्तव्यम् । Note: A pluta vowel, like a pragr̥hya, is not combined with the fol- lowing vowel in sandhi, cf. P.6.1.125 (प्लुतप्रगृह्या अचि नित्यम्). Though there is no specific rule in the CA teaching this feature of a pluta vowel, this seems to have been taken for granted by the present rule.

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 624 Whitney remarks: “The reading of the manuscript is unfortunately cor- rupt at the end, where the required Krama is to be given.” The commentary further confuses the issue by interpreting the word aplutavat as a non-adver- bial, by paraphrasing it as: सः अप्लुतवता परिहर्तव्यः. Whitney translates this phrase as: “it (= protracted a) must be repeated along with [or, in the form of] an unprotracted a.” In the original rule, the expression aplutavat is adverbial in the same manner as it is in P.6.1.129 (अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते). Pāṇini’s rule makes it somewhat more transparent that by the term aplutavat we are given permission to combine a pluta vowel with the following vowel of iti, something which was otherwise not permitted by P.6.1.125. Thus, the CA rule says that when in the parihāra repetition, the word babhūvā̃3 is followed by iti, the final ā̃3 is treated as if it were not pluta, i.e. it is allowed to combine with the following i of iti. ४.४.२२. अनुनासिकः पूर्वश्च शुद्धः । Whitney (4.121). M: अनुनासिकश्च°. P adds a daṇḍa after this as a cor- rection. Translation: [The vowel, which is seen] previously [i.e. in the Saṃhitā and Pada] as a nasal [vowel], is [restored to] a pure [i.e. non-nasal, vowel before the iti of a parihāra repetition]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यः पूर्वमनुनासिको दृष्टः स परिहार- काले शुद्ध[ः?] कृत्वा परिहर्तव्यः । एतदेवोदाहरणम् । अत्रैव ‘पुरु॑ष आ ब॒भू॒वाँ३ इत्यवसाने’ (च.आ. १.३.९) इति अवसाने आ इतिपूर्वमनुनासिको दृष्टः शुद्धः परिह- र्तव्यः । ‘ब॒भू॒वेति॑ बभवाँ३’ । ‘यथाशास्त्रं प्रसन्धानम्’ (च.आ. ४.४.२३) उक्तम् । ‘तस्यान्तेन परस्य प्रसन्धानम्’ (च.आ. ४.४.१२) इति । तत्र सन्धानविधानं नोक्तम् । उच्यते। Note: Thus, in a parihāra repetition, when babhūvā̃3 is combined with iti, the previous rule gives us the permission to treat ā̃3 as if it were not a prolated vowel and hence to combine it with iti. However, even if it were to be treated as a non-prolated vowel, it would still remain a nasal ā̃, and combined with the following i, it would yield a nasal ẽ in babhūvẽti. The present rule

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका625 says that the nasal vowel should be first restored to a non-nasal vowel and then combined with the following vowel. Thus we get the desired form babhūveti. The full krama repetition reads as: babhūveti babhūvā̃3. CA (1.3.8) ensures that the form babhūva in the phrase puruṣa ā babhūva appears as babhūvā̃3 before a pause. Whitney’s discussion on this rule is entirely misguided. He seems to think that the present rule would teach the krama reading babhūveti babhūva, while CA (1.3.8) would have us read babhūveti babhūvā̃3. He, therefore, says: “It may be, however, that we ought to confess a discordance between the teachings of our treatise here and in the first chapter.” Whitney is misled to this conclusion because he gives CA (4.4.21) an interpretation which is too wide. It is not that a pluta vowel is treated as a non-pluta anywhere in the parihāra repetition, but that it is treated as a non-pluta before iti of the repetition. The present CA rule applies to the same context, and therefore there is no contra- diction in our treatise. ४.४.२३. यथाशास्त्रं प्रसन्धानम् । Whitney (4.122). C, E, F, O: यथाशास्त्रप्र°. Translation: The combination [of two successive words into a Krama-word] is made in accordance with the [general] rules [of sandhi]. Note: The rules which are used to combine Padas to form Saṃhitā are the same rules which are used to combine Padas to form a Krama-word. Compare the use of the expression yathāśāstram in APR (170, p.111). चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यद्यच्छास्त्रं यथाशास्त्रं यद्यत्पदशास्त्रे पदानां सन्धानलक्षणमुक्तमिहापि तदेकस्य क्रमपदस्य भवति। क्रमपदत्वादन्यशब्दशङ्कयोच्यते । तदेव मा स्यादिति । ४.४.२४. प्रगृह्यावगृह्यचर्चायां क्रमवदुत्तरस्मिन्नवग्रहः । Whitney (4.123). A, B, J: °ह्याचर्चा°. P: °ह्याचगृह्य°. Translation: In the carcā repetition of pragr̥hya words whose members are separable with an avagraha (in the Padapāṭha), [the carcā repetition is to be made] in a manner like the krama-[-

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 626 parihāra] repetition, [with separation of the divisible members] with an avagraha in the second occurrence [of the repetition]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यस्मिन्नवगृह्यत्वं [प्रगृह्यत्वं च] एक- स्मिन्नेव युगपद्भवति तत्प्रगृह्यावगृह्यम् । तत्र(H: व) चर्चायां क्रमवद्भवति । चर्चा द्वि(H: दि)र्वचनमित्यक्तम् । पदकालेऽपि तच्च क्रमकाले इव भवति । तस्य क्रमकालस्य रूपं परिहरेत् । प्रगृह्याणि चावगृह्याणि च परे(दे?) क्रमे परिक्रि[ °ह्रि?]यन्ते । प्रगृह्यावगृह्यं पुनः पदेष्वेव परिक्रि- [ °ह्रि?]यते । तत्र चावग्रहः कथम् । उत्तरस्मिन्नवग्रहः । उत्तरस्मिन्नेव द्वितीयेऽवग्रहः कार्यः । न प्रथमे । ‘विरू॑पे॒ इति॒ विऽरू॑पे’ (अ.वे. १०.७.६, ४२)। Note: For a detailed examination of Whitney’s views, see the Note on CA (4.3.2). ४.४.२५. समापाद्यानामन्ते संहितावद्वचनम् । Whitney (4.124). I: °पद्या°. Translation: Words which require reinstatement of the origi- nal form, if they occur at the end [of half-verse or verse], should be [first] recited [without such reinstatement] as in the saṃhitā [and then should be subjected to the parihāra repeti- tion]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - यानि समापाद्यानामन्तग(H: र्ग)तान्य- र्धर्चे(H: ते) यानि भवन्ति । तेषां संहितावद्वचनं कर्तव्यम् । यथा संहिताकाले भवन्ति तथा तानि । ‘सा वृ॒क्षाँ(H: त्ताँ)अ॒भि सि॑ष्यदे’ (अ.वे. ५.५.९, पद ! ‘सि॒स्य॒दे॒’)। सिष्यद इत्येवं पुनर्वक्तव्यम् । ततः परिहारः । ‘सि॒स्य॒द॒ इति॑ सिस्यदे’ । तथा ‘प्रणी॑तये’ (अ.वे. ६.२३.२, पद ! ‘प्रऽ- नी॑तये’) इत्यादयः सर्वे उदाहार्याः समानपदस्थाः ।

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका627 Note: The words siṣyade and praṇītaye occur at the end of half-verse. In their krama-parihāra repetition, we are asked to first recite the words as they are given in the saṃhitā, before reciting the parihāra. Thus we get the se- quences: siṣyade / sisyada íti sisyade, and práṇītaye / pránītaya íti prá-nītaye. Whitney says that “this special point is left untouched in all the other krama treatises.” It is perhaps peculiar to the AV tradition. The BORI manuscript (133/1879-80) of Krama for the 20th Kāṇḍa shows a slightly different state of affairs. In all the cases of samāpādyas, not just the ones that occur at the end of half-verses, one finds that the word as read in the Krama portion is always in its shape as seen in the Saṃhitā, and only in its parihāra does it show the restoration. For example, the words ह॒र्य॒ पु॒रु॒ष्टु॒त॒ occur at the end of the second Pāda of AV (20.6.2). Their Krama in the manuscript (folio 3) reads: ह॒र्य॒ पु॒रु॒ष्टु॒त॒ । पु॒रु॒स्तु॒तेति॑ पुरु°स्तुत. However, the same treatment is seen in this Krama manuscript for samāpādya words which do not occur at the end of a half-verse. Compare the Krama (folio 3) for the words प्र णो॑ धि॒तावा॑नं य॒ज्ञं in AV (20.6.3) which do not occur at the end of a half verse: प्र णो॑ । नो॒ धि॒तावा॑नं । धि॒तावा॑नं य॒ज्ञं । धि॒तवा॑न॒मिति॑ धि॒त°वा॑नं. This behavior is differ- ent from the prescription of the CA and the CAB. The BORI manuscripts (128/1879-80; 83/1880-81) of the Jaṭāpāṭha show the same behavior as seen in the Krama manuscript. It is not immediately clear how to account for this dif- ference. ४.४.२६. तस्य पुनरास्थापितं नाम । Whitney (4.125). C: °रास्थितं नाम. Translation: This [Saṃhitā-like recitation of a word which needs reinstatement of its original form] is given the designation āsthāpita. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - तस्य संहितावद्वचनस्य आस्थापितमि- त्येवं संज्ञा भवति । यत्र निमित्तनैमित्तिके एकत्र भवतः । यथा ‘सिष्यदे’ । अत्र हि अभ्यासकृतं षत्वमनुभवति । अभ्यास(H: स्य)षत्वयोरेकप[द]त्वात् । इह न भवति । ‘स्त्रि॒यामनु॑ षिच्यते’ (अ.वे. ६.११.२)। ‘तत् । स्त्रि॒याम् । अनु॑ । सि॒च्य॒ते॒’ (= पद)। इति न संहितावद्भवति । कुतोऽ-

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 628 स्मान्निमित्तनैमित्तिकानां भिन्नपदार्थत्व[पदस्थत्व?]मुच्यते । अन्वित्युपसर्गः । ‘उपसर्गात्सि(H: नि)चेः षत्वं स च नानापदे श्रुतः । तेनात्र

मेदं(H:

मिदि)

भूदित्येतदर्थमिदमुच्यते

॥’ (source?) Note: The phenomenon of āsthāpita takes place only when the trans- formation which is restored to its original is caused by word-internal causes, and not by causes in the preceding word. Thus, it applies to the form siṣyade, because the cerebralization here is caused by the vowel i in the same word. On the other hand, in the expression anu ṣicyate, the cerebralization is caused by the preceding u of anu which is treated as a separate word by the Padapāṭha. Whitney points out: “It might still seem doubtful, after all this lengthy exposi- tion, whether such a word as sicyate was regarded by the commentator as not to be separately spoken at all, or as to be separately spoken, only not in saṃhitā form, as follows: striyām anu : anu ṣicyate : sicyate : sicyata iti sicyate; but the latter interpretation seems to me the more probable.” The pattern anu ṣicyate : sicyate : sicyata iti sicyate reconstructed above by Whitney is not met with in the BORI Krama manuscript. However, we do find different treatment of word-internal and word-external changes. Contrast the following examples. After the Krama सु॒षाव॑ हर्यश्व (AV 20.117.1, folio 78), we get the parihāra in the form: सु॒सावेति॑ सु॒साव॑. this instance, the retroflexion is caused by word- internal conditions. However, we do not get any such parihāra in the example of AV (20.113.2, folio 79): प्र॒थ॒मो नि । नि षी॑दसि । सी॒द॒सि॒ सोम॑कामं. This is not followed by सीदसीति सीदसि. Since the Padapāṭha treats ni as a separate Pada, the same treatment is continued in the Kramapāṭha. Once the context of ni is removed in the Kramapāṭha in a sequence such as सी॒द॒सि॒ सोम॑कामं, the retroflexion naturally goes away, and there is no need to deliberately go for another explicit restoration. The passage निमित्तनैमित्तिकानां भिन्नपदार्थत्वम् in the CAB almost certainly must be emended to निमित्तनैमित्तिकानां भिन्नपदस्थत्वम्, cf. the CAB on CA 4.4.27. ४.४.२७. स एकपदः परिहार्यश्च परिहार्यश्च । Whitney (4.126). I: 28.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका629 Translation: The word [thus defined as an āsthāpita in the preceding rule] is a single-word [unit in the Kramapāṭha] and it is to be repeated [with an iti interposed in parihāra]. चतुराध्यायीभाष्य - परिहर्तव्यश्च स (Whitney:)आस्थापि- तसंज्ञैकपदः (H: आस्थितसंज्ञपदृशः)। योऽसौ संहि[ता]व[द्] द्विर्वचनेन निर्दिश्यते । निमित्तनैमित्तिकयो[ः] भिन्नपदस्थ(H: स्प्य)त्वात् । स परिहार्यश्च भवति । संहितावद्विडाचि(?) बहुलमिति ‘[शास्त्रे पुराणे कविभिर्दृष्टमेतत् वर्णलिङ्गस्वरविभक्तिवाक्यव्यत्य]यश्छन्दसीति’। (= APR 222, p. 168) ‘वर्ण(H: र्णा)लोपागमह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतआत्मने- [भा]षापरस्मै(H adds: वि)भाषा अपियन्ति’ ॥ (= APR 223, p. 168) ‘न तर्क(H: की)बुद्ध्या न च शास्त्रदृष्ट्या यथाम्नात(H: न)मन्यथा नैव कुर्यात् । आम्नातं परिषत्त(H: न्न)स्य शास्त्रं दृष्टो विधिर्व्यत्ययः पूर्वशास्त्रे’ ॥ (= APR, p. 169) ‘आम्नातव्यमनाम्नातं प्रपाठेऽस्मिन् क्वचित्पदम् । छन्दसोऽपरिमेयत्वात् परिषत्तस्य लक्षणं परिषत्तस्य लक्षणमिति॥’ (= APR, p. 169) Note: The final portion of the Caturādhyāyāyībhāṣya has a close par- allel in the final portion of the APR, and this also establishes a close connection between these two texts: शास्त्रे पुराणे कविभिर्दृष्टमेतत्

अध्याय ४, पाद ४ 630 वर्णलिङ्गस्वरविभक्तिवाक्यव्यत्ययश्छन्दसीति । वर्णलोपागमह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतात्मने- भाषा परस्मैभाषा अपियन्ति ॥ न तर्कबुद्ध्या न च शास्त्रदृष्ट्या यथाम्नातमन्यथा नैव कुर्यात् । आम्नातं परिषत्तस्य शास्त्रं दृष्टो विधिर्व्यत्ययः पूर्वशास्त्रे ॥ आम्नातव्यमनाम्नातं प्रपाठेऽस्मिन् क्वचित् पदम् । छन्दसोऽपरिमेयत्वात् परिषत्तस्य लक्षणं परिषत्तस्य लक्षणमिति ॥ इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः । चतुर्थोऽध्यायः समाप्तः । समाप्ता चतुराध्यायिका ॥ H: इति शौनकीयं चतुराध्यायिके चतुर्थः पादः । चतुरध्यायिभाष्य समाप्तः. F: चतुर्थस्य चतुर्थः पादः । आथर्वणे चतुराध्यायिकायां चतुर्थोध्यायः । ग्रंथसंख्या ५८०. G: इति चतुर्थाध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः। सूत्राणि १७४ । इति चतुर्थोध्यायः. I: प्र. सू ११० । द्वि. सू. १०७ । तृ. सू. १२५ । च. सू. १७४ । इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिका समाप्ता । सूत्रैक्यं ५१६ । इति कौत्सव्याकरणं समाप्तम्. O: इत्यथर्ववेदे कौत्सव्याकरणे चतुराध्यायिकायां चतुर्थोध्यायस्य चतुर्थः पादः ॥ समाप्तः सूत्राणि ॥२७॥ चतुर्थोध्यायः ॥४॥. The numbers of rules in each Adhyāya given in these colophons are useful only in a general way. Since the manuscripts do not fully agree with each other, we cannot take the numbers too seriously. However, one must keep in mind that different numberings probably refer to different interpretive traditions. ______________________________

॥ श्रीमदथर्वकौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः ॥ ॥ कृष्णदासप्रणीतः ॥1 ॥ श्रीगणेशाय नमः ॥ ॐ अथर्वाणमृषिं देवं हयग्रीवशिरोधरम्। कर्तुमाङ्गिरसव्याख्यां नमस्ये शिरसासकृत् ॥१॥2 चत्वारि वाक्परिमितानि पदानि यस्मात् पर्युद्भवन्ति पुरुसम्मतभाञ्जि नित्यम् ॥ ओङ्कारमादिपुरुषं सगुणं सशब्दम् मात्राक्षराधिपतिमीश्वरमानतोऽस्मि ॥२॥ शब्दार्णवो दुरवगाहन एव यस्य निर्मन्थनाय विबुधा अपि यद्विषेदुः ॥ तद्रत्नजातमलभत्स (?) तु कोऽपि नासी- च्चेल्लभ्यते विहगवाहनमामतेयात् ॥३॥ श्रीकेशवस्य चरणद्वितयाश्रयेण हंसस्य योगमधिगम्य तु कृष्णदासः ॥ कर्तुं समीहति यथामति पञ्चसन्धि- माथर्वणाङ्गिरससूत्रमतप्रपाठीम् ॥४॥

1This edition is based on the lone manuscript (K) of this commentary found at the Vaidika Saṁśodhana Maṇḍaḷa, Pune. I have numbered the Sūtras and placed them in bold-face. 2The first two quarters of this verse are comparable with the first two quarters of the first verse of Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi : अथर्वाणमृषिं देवं देवं हयशिरोधरम्.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 632 शास्त्रप्रशंसा तत्र तावच्छास्त्रप्रशंसा । इदं व्याकरणं शब्दशास्त्रमित्यभिधीयते । शब्द इति निगमेषु वाचो नाम । वाक् सरस्वती । तस्या भगवतो वैराजस्य मुखे निवासार्हत्वात्तत्राग्नेरपि निवाससामानाधिकरण्यात्सरस्वत्यास्तेजस्वित्व- मुक्तम् । अत एव शब्दशास्त्रमज्ञानान्ध्यं दूरीकृत्य प्रकाशं कुरुते । तच्छब्दशास्त्रं तपोबलं विना न प्राप्यते । तदुक्तं यास्केन - ‘सेयं विद्या श्रुतिमतिबुद्धिस्तस्यास्तपसा पारमीप्सितव्यम् । तदिदमायुरिच्छता न निर्वक्तव्यम्’ (निरुक्त १३.१३) इति । मन्त्रेऽपि च । ‘क्व॒स्वि॒द॒स्याः॒ प॒र॒मं ज॑गाम’ (ऋग्वेद ८.१००.१०), ‘धे॒नुर्वाग॒स्मानुप॒ सुष्टु॒तैतु॑’ (ऋग्वेद ८. १००.११) इति सिद्धान्तः । तपः षड्विधम् । ‘अर्चाकोटिगुणं स्तोत्रं स्तोत्रात्कोटिगुणो जपः । जपाद् ध्यानं ततो ज्ञानं ज्ञानात्कोटिगुणो लयः ॥’ इति योगशास्त्रे (source?)। अथ च यदा भगवतो महापुरुषस्य नाभि- कमलाद् ब्रह्माजायत तमितिकर्त्तव्यताभ्रमेण मूढं ज्ञात्वादभ्रकरुण आदि- पुरुषस्तप तपेत्युपदिदेश । ततो ब्रह्मा मननेन सविकल्पकं ध्यानेन निर्वि- कल्पकं च तप्त्वा उत्पन्नबोधो नाभिनालद्वारान्तः प्रविवेश तत्र ब्रह्मा- ण्डगोलं सृष्टिचक्रं वेदांश्च ददर्श । तत्र निगमानां वेदमूलत्वाद्भगवता निघण्टुषु यानि पदानि चतुर्थपञ्चमाध्यायगतानि तानि दर्शितानि । ततो नामाख्यातजातदार्ढ्याय ब्रह्मणाध्यायत्रयं पठितम् । इति भाति एकार्थाने- कशब्दत्वात् । अयमेवोपदेशः श्रीभागवते प्रोक्तोऽस्ति वानेकार्थैकशब्दत्वा- दध्यायद्वयस्य यास्कोक्तत्वाच्चतुर्थाध्यायस्यातिगहनत्वाच्च । ‘तेने ब्रह्म हृदा य आदिकवये मुह्यन्ति यत्सूरयः’ (भागवतपुराण १.१.१b) इत्युक्तम- स्ति । अत्र युक्तमयुक्तं श्रीगुरुर्जानाति । इति वेदोत्पत्तिमूलम् । अथ व्याकरणोत्पत्तिमूलम् । तदुक्तमैतरेयेण । ‘प्रजापतिरकाम- यत । प्रजायेय भूयान्स्यामिति । स तपोऽतप्यत । स तत इमाँल्लोकानसृ- जत पृथिवीमन्तरिक्षं दिवम् । तेभ्यः क्रमेण त्रीणि ज्योतींष्यजायन्ताग्नि- र्वायुरादित्य इति । तेभ्योऽभितप्तेभ्यस्त्रयो वेदा अजायन्त । ऋग्वेदोऽग्नेर्यजु-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका633 र्वेदो वायोः सामवेद आदित्यात् । तेभ्यस्तप्तेभ्यस्त्रीणि बीजान्यजायन्त । भूर्ऋचो भुवो यजुषः स्वः साम्नः । तेभ्यस्त्रयो वर्णा जज्ञिरेऽकार उकारो मकार इति । तानेकत्राकरोत्’3। अत्रैक्यकरणाय व्याकरणमुदभूत् । तेन सन्धिः साधितः । तदोमिति सिद्धम् । अस्य ब्रह्मरूपत्वान् माहात्म्य- मैतरेयः4 । ‘ओमिति वै दैवं तथेति मानुषम् । दैवेन चैवैनं तन्मानुषेण च पापात्प्रमुञ्चति’5। अतः प्रणवः परं ब्रह्म । तदुपासनार्थं नम इति पदम् । तदुक्तं मन्त्रे ‘यो नम॑सा स्वध्व॒र’ (ऋग्वेद ८.१९.५c) इति । आश्वलायन- स्तु ‘नमस्कारेण वै खल्वपि न वै देवा नमस्कारमति (K: °न्ति)’। अति- क्रामन्तीत्यर्थः । ‘यज्ञो वै नम इति हि ब्राह्मणं भवति6 इति’ । अतः

3The passage, as it appears in the Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa (25.7, Vol. II., p. 667), reads: प्रजापतिरकामयत प्रजायेय भूयान्स्यामिति स तपोऽतप्यत स तपस्तप्त्वेमालँ्लोकान- सृजत पृथिवीमन्तरिक्षं दिवं तालँ्लोकानभ्यतपत्तेभ्योऽभितप्तेभ्योऽभितप्तेभ्यस्त्रीणि ज्योतींष्य- जायन्ताग्निरेव पृथिव्या अजायत वायुरन्तरिक्षादादित्यो दिवस्तानि ज्योतींष्यभ्यतपत्तेभ्योऽभि- तप्तेभ्यस्त्रयो वेदा अजायन्त ऋग्वेद एवाग्नेरजायत यजुर्वेदो वायोः सामवेद आदित्यात्तान्वेदान् अभ्यतपत्तेभ्योऽभितप्तेभ्यस्त्रीणि शुक्राण्यजायन्त भूरित्येव ऋग्वेदादजायत भुव इति यजुर्वेदा- त्स्वरिति सामवेदात् । तानि शुक्राण्यभ्यतपत्तेभ्योऽभितप्तेभ्यस्त्रयो वर्णा अजायन्ताकार उकारो मकार इति तानेकधा समभरत्तदेतदोमिति । Kshitish Chandra Chatterji (1948, 1964: 286) refers to this passage and says that the element -kāra appears to occur for the first with letters of the alphabet in AB (xxv.7). Thus, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa has indeed referred to one of the earliest references to individual sounds and their combination. 4Compare: Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa (25.7, Vol.II., p. 668): यदेतत्त्रय्यै विद्यायै शुक्रं तेन ब्रह्मत्वमकरोत् । 5Compare: Aitareya-Brāhmaṇa (33.6, Vol.II., p. 859): ओमिति वै दैवं तथेति मानुषं दैवेन चैवैनं तन्मानुषेण च पापादेनसः प्रमुञ्चति । 6This is a citation from the Āśvalāyanagr̥hyasūtra (1.1.5): य इमं स्वाध्यायमधीयते इति यो नमसा स्वध्वर इति नमस्कारेण वै खल्वपि न वै देवा नमस्कारमति यज्ञो वै नम इति हि ब्राह्मणं भवति । The Āśvalāyanagr̥hyasūtra quotes RV (8.19.5c): ‘यो नम॑सा स्वध्व॒रः.’ Other citations are comparable to ‘नमो नम इति यज्ञो वै नमो यज्ञेनैवेनानेतन्नमस्कारेण नमस्यति,’ Śatapatha-Brāhmaṇa (7.4.1.20, and 9.1.1.16) and ‘न हि नमस्कारमति देवाः’ Gopatha-Brāhmaṇa (2.2.1.18). The Śāṃkhāyana Āraṇyaka (1.5) also has a similar passage. For the sources of the Āśva- lāyanagr̥hyasūtra, see: V.M. Apte (1940-41), Vol.III, Nos. 2-7, pp. 5-6.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 634 ‘ॐ नमः सिद्धम्’7 । यद्वा कञ्चित् सिद्धं नमस्करोत्याचार्यः । ‘उपपदविभक्तेः कारकविभक्तिर्बलीयसी’ति (महाभाष्य on P.1.4.96; परि- भाषेन्दुशेखर, परिभाषा ९४) चतुर्थ्यर्थे द्वितीया । ॐ नमः सिद्धायेति भावः । तर्हि सिद्धः कः । सिद्धः पदसमाम्नायः । पदसमाम्नायः कः । अत्र यास्कः - ‘समाम्नायः समाम्नातः स व्याख्यातव्यस्तमिमं समाम्नायं निघण्टव इत्याचक्षते । निघण्टवः कस्मान्निगमा इमे भवन्ति’ (निरुक्त, १.१) । अतो वेदपुरुषाय नमः इत्यर्थः । पदसमाम्नायश्चतुर्धा । नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातभेदेन । ‘पदप्रकृतिः संहिता’8 (निरुक्त, १.१७;

7It almost looks like the initial Sūtra of the work that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is commenting upon. However, no manuscripts of the CA or Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa contain this as a Sūtra. This is comparable to Mugdhabodha-Vyākaraṇa (1.1: ॐ नमः शिवाय). We may also note that in the region of Maharashtra, the traditional education of a child began by the words ओनामासीधम्, which is nothing but a vernacularized form of ॐ नमः सिद्धम्. This practice presumably has its origin in the Jain tradition. The Marāṭhī Jain work Ādinātha-Purāṇa (7.95) says that the education of a child began with the mantra ॐ नमः सिद्धेभ्यः, and then the child was introduced to the alphabet (see: Subhashchandra Akkole, 1968, p. 209). The word siddha is associated with the alphabet also in the Kātantra Vyākaraṇa (1.1.1: सिद्धो वर्णसमाम्नायः). The salutation ॐ नमः सिद्धेभ्यः also occurs at the beginning of the Kātantrarūpamālāvyākaraṇa (p. 1). It is not clear whether it is part of the original text, or something added by the editor. In any case, the connection with Jain traditions is unmistakable, because the editor views Śarvavarman, the author of the Kātantra-Vyākaraṇa, to be a Jain, and Bhāvasena Traividyadeva, the author of the Kātantrarūpamālā, is indeed a Jain author. 8This statement is interpreted in two opposite ways by different traditions. Generally, the later grammarians interpret it to mean that the Saṃhitāpāṭha is the source of the Padapāṭha, in the sense that the words given as separate items in the Padapāṭha are isolated from the Saṃhitā. This view is found in the commentary of Puṇyarāja on Vākyapadīya (2.1-2). The reverse inter- pretation is generally found in the Prātiśākhya tradition which believes that the Saṃhitāpāṭha is produced by applying the rules of sandhi to the isolated words given in the Padapāṭha, and hence the latter is the source of the former. This is stated clearly by Uvaṭa in his commentary on RPR (2.1): पदानि प्रकृतिभूतानि यस्याः संहितायाः सा पदप्रकृतिः संहितात्र विकारः । तथा हि

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका635 ‘संहिता पदप्रकृतिः,’ ऋग्वेदप्रातिशाख्य, २.१) इति न्यायेन तत्साधकं व्याकरणम् । तदुक्तमाथर्वणिके - १. चतुर्णां पदजातानाम् (च.आ. १.१.२) इति शास्त्रप्रशंसा ॥१॥ अत्र षट् प्रकरणानि । शास्त्र- प्रशंसा ॥१॥ स्थानप्रयत्नविवेकः ॥२॥ संज्ञाप्रकरणम् ॥३॥ परिभाषा- प्रकरणम् ॥४॥ सन्धिसाधनम् ॥५॥ स्वरसाधनम् ॥६॥9 शास्त्रप्रशंसा प्रथमा द्वितीयः स्थानप्रयत्नस्य विवेककल्पः । संज्ञा तृतीया परिभाषणं च सन्धिः स्वरज्ञानमितीह षट्कम् ॥ स्थानप्रयत्नविवेकः तत्र तावत् सन्ध्युपयोगाय स्थानप्रयत्नविवेकः । ‘तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सव- र्णम्’ (पा. १.१.९) इति पाणिनिः । तुल्यं स्थानं प्रयत्नश्च यस्याक्षरस्य येनाक्षरेण तन्मिथः सवर्णं स्यात्10 । संहितायां सवर्णधर्मं प्राप्नोति । स्थानविवेको यथा । २. मुखे विशेषाः करणस्य (च.आ. १.१.१८)। वर्णोच्चारस्येति भावः । ‘साधकतमं करणम्’ (पा. १.४.४२) इति

षत्वणत्वादयो विकाराः संहिताया एव भवन्ति । प्रकृतिभूतत्वाच्च पदानां सिद्धत्वम् । In contrast with the view of Puṇyarāja mentioned above, Cardona (1991: 129) has argued that “Pāṇini fits right in with a long tradition of considering the padapāṭha the source text by means of which the saṃhitāpāṭha and recitations such as the kramapāṭha are accounted for.” Kr̥ṣṇadāsa seems to be within this latter view. 9There is a certain ambiguity about the actual extent of the sections referred to here as sandhisādhana and svarasādhana, since these terms are not used again in the text. For instance, does the word sandhisādhana refer to the preliminaries of the sandhi section, or does it refer to all the sandhi sections taken together? Similarly, does the word svarasādhana refer to vowel-sandhi section, later referred to as svarasandhi, or does it refer to accents? The verse that follows would perhaps support a view that sandhisādhana referred to all sandhi sections taken together, and that the word svarasādhana was equal to svarajñāna in the sense of treatment of accents. However, the text as we have it does not have any systematic treatment of accents. 10Compare: ताल्वादिस्थानमाभ्यन्तरप्रयत्नश्चेत्येतद् द्वयं यस्य येन तुल्यं तन्मिथः सवर्णसंज्ञं स्यात् । SK on P.1.1.9, p. 5.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 636 पाणिनिः । स्वरहकारविसर्जनीयानां11 कण्ठः । ३. कण्ठ्यानामधरकण्ठ्यः (च.आ. १.१.१९)। कवर्गस्य जिह्वामूलम् । ४. जिह्वामूलीयानां हनुमूलम् (च.आ. १.१.२०)। तत्र नामिस्वराणां प्रत्येकं स्थानद्वयम् । हकारस्यापि पञ्चमैर्वर्णैर्योगादन्तस्थाभिर्वा योगाद्धृदयम्12

। एऐइचुयशा- स्तालव्याः । ५. तालव्यानां मध्यजिह्वम् (च.आ. १.१.२१)। जिह्वा- मध्यभागस्पर्शे उच्चारः । ऋटुरषा मूर्धन्याः । ६. मूर्धन्यानां जिह्वाग्रं परिवेष्टितम् (च.आ. १.१.२२)। ७. षकारस्य द्रोणिका (च.आ. १.१.२३)। ८. रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि (च.आ. १.१.२८)। ऌतुलसा दन्त्याः । ९. दन्त्यानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रस्तीर्णम् (च.आ. १.१.२४)। ओऔउपूपध्मानीया औष्ठ्याः । १०. औष्ठ्यानामधरौष्ठ्यम् (च.आ. १.१.२५)। दन्त्यौष्ठ्यो वकारः13 । केवलोऽनुस्वारो नासिक्यः14 । ११. नासिक्यानां नासिका (च.आ. १.१.२६)। अन्ये वर्णा ङञणनमास्ते वर्गेषु उत्तमा अनुनासिकाः । १२. अनुनासिकानां मुखनासिकम् (च.आ. १.१.२७)। इति स्थानानि । प्रयत्नो द्विधा । आभ्यन्तरो बाह्यश्च । तत्राभ्यन्तरश्चतुर्धा । स्पृष्टेषत्स्पृष्टविवृतसंवृतभेदात्15 । कादयो

11The inclusion of all svaras among kaṇṭhya sounds is inexplicable. Contrast: SK on P.1.1.9 (p. 4): अकुहविसर्जनीयानां कण्ठः । However, after PS 4, below, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa says: तत्र नामिस्वराणां प्रत्येकं स्थानद्वयम्, namely that the nāmin vowels, i.e. vowels other than a and ā each have two points of articulation. This probably means that he seriously believes that all vowels are minimally kaṇṭhya, and some may have an additional point of articulation. No other text on Sanskrit grammar or phonetics entertains such a notion. 12This refers to the notion that the sound h is an aurasya ‘pulmonary’ when it is combined with nasals and semi-vowels, but it is kaṇṭhya ‘glottal’ when uncombined. This is conveyed by the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā (verse 16): हकारं पञ्चमै- र्युक्तमन्तःस्थाभिश्च संयुतम् । औरस्यं तं विजानीयात्कण्ठ्यमाहुरसंयुतम् ॥ 13This view is imported from the late Pāṇinian commentators 14The text of the CA actually makes no reference to anusvāra. The general view is that the CA does not have the notion of anusvāra, and that it accepts only the nasalized vowels. 15Compare: इति स्थानानि । यत्नो द्विधा । आभ्यन्तरो बाह्यश्च । आद्यश्चतुर्धा । स्पृष्टे- षत्स्पृष्टविवृतसंवृतभेदात् । SK on P.1.1.9, p. 5.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका637 मावसानाः स्पर्शाः16 इति पाणिनीयाः । १३. स्पर्शाः प्रथमोत्तमाः (च.आ. १.१.८)। प्रथमपञ्चमा इत्यर्थः17 । १४. प्रथमान्तानि तृती- यान्तानि (च.आ. १.१.१०) इति (।) यः प्रथमस्य प्रयत्नः स एव तृतीयस्येति ज्ञेयम्18 । १५. न चवर्गः (च.आ. १.१.९)। वर्गस्य प्रयोजनं सर्वत्र समानमिति न19 । १६. विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये (च.आ. १.१.४)। सामान्ये शास्त्रे यत्प्राप्तं तद्विभाषा नाम विकल्पः । ‘सामान्य- शास्त्रतो नूनं विशेषो बलवान्भवेत्’20 इति । १७. शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः (च.आ. १.१.१० अंशः)। १८. अधिस्पर्शं च (च.आ. १.१.११)। स्पर्शेष्वधिकारो यस्य तदपि च । प्रातिशाख्ये यमाः प्रसिद्धा- स्तेऽपि स्पर्शाः21 । १९. द्वितीयचतुर्थाः सोष्माणः (च.आ. १.१.१२)। वर्गेषु द्वितीयचतुर्था वर्णास्ते स्पर्शा एव परन्तु किञ्चिदधिकश्वासोच्चार- सहिता22 अत एव सोष्माणः । २०. स्पृष्टं स्पर्शानां करणम् (च.आ.

16Compare: कादयो मावसानाः स्पर्शाः । SK on P.8.2.1, p. 6. 17Kr̥ṣṇadāsa offers no real interpretation for this rule, unless somehow his comment is taken to mean that the first and the final members of the series are called sparśas. Even this does not make any sense. The rule is actually meant to say that, among all the sparśas, the first and the final members can occur word-finally (padya). 18This interpretation is substantially far off from what the original rule is supposed to mean. See the other commentaries and notes on CA (1.1.10). Also note that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa has split the original rule into two separate rules: PS 14 and 17. 19The rule CA (1.1.9) is actually an exception to CA (1.1.8 = PS 13), and means that members of the c-series do not occur word-finally. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s paraphrase does not bring out this meaning. It seems to say: “It is not the case that the purpose of the/a varga is everywhere the same.” I am not quite sure what he intends to say. 20This appears to be a citation from the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 9). The com- plete verse is as follows: सामान्यशास्त्रतो नूनं विशेषो बलवान्भवेत् । परेण पूर्वबाधो वा प्रायशो दृश्यतामिह ॥ 21Compare: यमो नाम पूर्वसदृशो वर्णः प्रातिशाख्ये प्रसिद्धः । SK on P.8.2.1, p. 5. 22Compare RPR (13.19): शीघ्रतरं सोष्मसु प्राणमेके. Uvaṭa on this rule: सर्वेषु वर्णेषु स्थानकरणानुप्रदानानि त्रयो गुणाः समानाः । सोष्मसूष्मा गुणोऽधिकः ।

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 638 १.१.२९)। स्पर्शानां स्पृष्टः प्रयत्नः । यरलवा अन्तस्थाः । २१. ईष- त्स्पृष्टमन्तस्थानाम् (च.आ. १.१.३०)। अन्तस्थानामीषत्स्पृष्टः प्रयत्नः । शषसहा ऊष्माणः । अआइईउऊएऐओऔअंअः इति स्वराः23 । २२. ऊष्मणां विवृतं च (च.आ. १.१.३१)। २३. स्वराणां च (च.आ. १.१.३२)। ‘स्वराणामूष्मणां चैव विवृतं करणं स्मृतम्’ (पाणिनीयशिक्षा, २१) इति शिक्षायाम्24 । २४. एकेऽस्पृष्टम् (च.आ. १.१.३३)। एओ विवृततरौ25 । २५. ऐकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम् (च.आ. १.१. ३४)। २६. ततोऽप्याकारस्य (च.आ. १.१.३५)। एतानि स्फुटा- र्थानि । २७. संवृतोऽकारः (च.आ. १.१.३६)। विवृतमनूद्य संवृतोऽ- नेन विधीयते26 ह्रस्वस्यावर्णस्य प्रयोगे संवृतं प्रक्रियादशायां तु विवृतमेव27 ।

23One may perhaps justify the exclusion of r̥, r̥̄, and l̥ from this listing, because these vowels contain consonantal constituents, but the inclusion of aṃ and aḥ among vowels makes no sense. The author is misled by the fact that in most traditional mātr̥kā alphabets, aṃ and aḥ follow the vowels. This is the way the sounds named anusvāra (= ṃ) and visarga (= ḥ) are traditionally cited, cf. VPR (8.21: अं इत्यनुस्वारः) and VPR (8.22: अः इति विसर्जनीयः). Perhaps, the author is influenced by the Tāntric view of Sanskrit alphabet, which often in- cluded these two sounds among vowels. For a detailed exposition of the Tantrik view, see: Rāmājñā Pandey (1986: 26, 38, 48). 24From this citation, it is clear that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa does not interpret PS 22 (= CA 1.1.31) to mean that the effort for the spirants is īṣad-vivr̥ta. For further discussion, see the notes on CA (1.1.31). 25The original CA rule (1.1.34) was simply एकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम्, but it was expanded in certain sub-schools to एकारौकारयोर्विवृततरम् ऐकारौकारयोर्विवृत- तमम्। See the notes on CA (1.1.34).. 26Compare: विवृतमनूद्य संवृतोऽनेन विधीयते । SK on P.8.4.68, p. 5. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa would have us believe that the CA had open (vivr̥ta) short a in the deriva- tional process, but the present rule, like P.8.4.68 (अ अ), reinstates the close (saṃvr̥ta) a in the usable utterance. There is no reason to believe that the CA had any such notion. The rule here is a straight forward description that short a is a close sound. Pāṇini needed to make an adjustment of this sort to have the sounds a and ā become savarṇa ‘homogeneous’ with each other by P.1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्). The original CA does not have any such defini- tion of the term savarṇa, and hence does not need such an accommodation.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका639 २८. संस्पृष्टरेफमृवर्णम् (च.आ. १.१.३७)। २९. दीर्घप्लुतयोः पूर्वा मात्रा (च.आ. १.१.३८)। संस्पृष्टेत्यर्थः । ३०. सलकारम्ऌवर्णम् (च.आ. १.१.३९)। ऌवर्णमपीत्यर्थः । ३१. सन्ध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्ट- वर्णान्येकवर्णवद् वृत्तिः (च.आ. १.१.४०)। निपातवद् वृत्तिरि- त्यर्थः28 । परन्तु ३२. नैकारौकारयोः स्थानविधौ (च.आ. १.१.४१) इति आभ्यन्तरम् । अत्र सूत्रे प्रक्रियाद्वयं दृश्यते ‘सरूपाणामेकशेष’ … (पा. १.२.६४) इत्येका वृत्तिः29 । ‘नाज्झलौ’ (पा. १.१.१०) इति पाणिनीये आकारप्रश्लेष इवार्थबलात्30 । ‘हलन्त्यम्’ (पा. १.३.३) इति- वत्31 । बाह्यप्रयत्नोऽपि चतुर्धैवोपयोगार्थः । श्वासनादघोषाघोषभेदात् ।32

For further details, see: Deshpande (1975: 13, 91-93). 27Compare: ह्रस्वस्यावर्णस्य प्रयोगे संवृतम् । प्रक्रियादशायां तु विवृतमेव । SK on P.1.1.9, p. 5. 28This is a somewhat cryptic remark. It is not clear what Kr̥ṣṇadāsa finds common between a diphthong and a particle. It is possible that nipātavat is a scribal error for nipātanavat. A nipātana is a word which is approved as a whole, without making any effort to separate its constituents. Thus, a nipā- tana may be viewed as a word which has seeming parts, but is treated as if it is partless. Similarly, a diphthong has parts, and yet it is treated as a single sound (ekavarṇavat). 29As far as I can make sense of this comment, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is proposing that CA (1.1.41) be given two readings a) na ekāra-okārayoḥ, and b) na aikāra- aukārayoḥ. Both the readings, after sandhi, lead to the same text: naikārau- kārayoḥ. For further discussion, see notes on CA (1.1.41). 30Commenting on P.1.1.10 (नाज्झलौ), Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita splits this rule as na+ā+ ac+halau, instead of what would normally be na+ac+halau. The insertion of ā in the rule here is termed ākārapraśleṣa. See: ‘नाज्झला’विति निषेधो यद्यप्याक्षर- समाम्नायिकानामेव तथापि हकारस्याऽऽकारो न सवर्णः, तत्राऽऽकारस्यापि प्रश्लिष्टत्वात् । तेन विश्वपाभिरित्यत्र ‘हो ढ’ इति ढत्वं न भवति । SK on P.1.1.69, p. 6. 31The rule P.1.3.3 (हलन्त्यम्) is traditionally given two interpretations, by repeat- ing it twice. For details, see: Deshpande (1975: 41-42). 32While the SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 5) offers an eleven-fold division of the bāhya- prayatnas, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa here focuses upon only four of them. Perhaps, the other kinds of bāhyaprayatnas are viewed as being not relevant in the context of the sandhis he discusses. He does not deal with the interaction of accents in sandhis.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 640 ‘खयां यमाः खयᳲकᳲपौ विसर्गः शर एव च । एते श्वासानुप्रदाना अघोषाश्च विवृण्वते ॥ कण्ठमन्ये तु घोषाः स्युः संवृता नादभागिनः ।’33 इति पाणिनीयाः । कखचछटठतथपफा एषां यमाश्च । जिह्वामूलीयो- पध्मानीयविसर्गाः शषसाश्चैते अघोषश्वासानुप्रदानाः । ‘अन्ये तु’ । गघङज- झञडढणदधनबभमाः एषां यमाश्च यरलवहाः एते विंशतिर्वर्णा घोषनाद- भागिनः । नादलक्षणं तु34 । ३३. पीडितः सन्नतरो हीनश्वासनादः (च.आ. १.२.३)। उच्चारणे दृब्ध इत्यर्थः । बाह्यप्रयत्नाश्च यद्यपि सवर्णसंज्ञां न प्राप्नुवन्ति तथापि स्थानकार्यं कुर्वन्ति35 । इति बाह्यप्रयत्नः । इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्सव्याकरणे स्थानप्रयत्नविवेकः36 ॥ संज्ञाप्रकरणम् आचार्यनाम्नो विभाषा ज्ञेया37 (।) परिभाषा ‘वर्णे वर्णे कारट्’38 । वर्णजातौ प्रत्येकवर्णे कारट्प्रत्ययः स्यात् । ‘अइउऋऌ समानाः’39 । एषां

33These verses are not found in the standard versions of Pāṇinīyaśikṣā, but are cited in the SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 5). The commentary Tattvabodhinī on these verses says that the external efforts were listed in verses by someone for easier comprehension: बालबोधनाय बाह्यप्रयत्नाः कैश्चित्सुगमोपायेनोपनिबद्धाः। Tattva- bodhinī on SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 5). 34What follows is quite clearly not a nādalakṣaṇa ‘definition of nāda.’ For better interpretations, see notes on CA (1.2.3). 35Compare: बाह्यप्रयत्नाश्च यद्यपि सवर्णसंज्ञायामनुपयुक्तास्तथाप्यान्तरतम्यपरीक्षायामुपयोक्ष्यन्त इति बोध्यम् । SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 6). 36Compare: इति स्थानप्रयत्नविवेकः । SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 6). 37This is an interesting formulation. Wherever Pāṇini refers to the views of other grammarians by citing their names, he probably intends to refer to dialectal variation in Sanskrit. On the other hand, Kātyāyana and Patañjali interpret such references as being no more than indications of options. For a detailed consideration of this question, see: Deshpande (1978). 38Compare Kātyāyana’s Vārttika: वर्णात्कारः on P.3.3.108. The marker sound Ṭ in the affix kāraṬ is intriguing. It is not clear what it was intended for in the system from which this statement is cited.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका641 पञ्चस्वराणां ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतभेदेऽपि समाना इति संज्ञा । एतेषां निपाता- धिकारात्सन्धिर्न40 । ३४. निपातोऽपृक्तोऽनाकारः (च.आ. १.३.१७)। असंश्लिष्टः स्वरः सन्धिं न प्राप्नोतीत्यग्रे प्रकृतिभावगतं सूत्रम् । तत्र आकारो न । ‘अपृक्त एकाल्प्रत्ययः’ (पा. १.२.४१)। ‘निपात एकाज- नाङ्’ (पा. १.१.१४) इति पाणिनिः । समानत्वं किम् । ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुता- नुनासिकाननुनासिकोदात्तानुदात्तस्वरितभेदेन प्रत्येकमेते पञ्च स्वरा अष्टा- दशधा तुल्यं धर्मं प्राप्नुवन्ति41 । अनुनासिकाः स्वराः नपुंसकलिङ्गविभक्ति- साधकाः । ३५. अनुनासिकोऽन्तःपदे ह्रस्वः (च.आ. १.३.२१)। ३६. दीर्घो नपुंसकबहुवचने (च.आ. १.३.२२)। ‘प्रश्ने प्लुते च’42 इति सूत्रसामर्थ्यात् ज्ञायते । ‘प्रतिज्ञानुनासिक्याः पाणिनीयाः’43 । ३७.

39This is probably a citation of Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (1.1, p. 1). Pāṇini does not use the term samāna, but the Prātiśākhyas use the term samāna or samānākṣara to refer to simple vowels. 40This concern as to why the sounds listed as samānas do not undergo sandhi in the very listing is analogous to the concern expressed by the Pāṇinian grammarians about the sound-listing in the Śivasūtras. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s explana- tion is very similar to the explanation found in the commentary Tattva- bodhinī on SK (pp. 1-2): वर्णानामसंदिग्धत्वेन बोधनाय संहिताया अविवक्षणादेतेष्वसंधिः। स्वराणां चादिषु पाठात् ‘चादयोऽसत्त्वे’ इति निपातसंज्ञायां ‘निपात एकाजनाङ्’ इति प्रगृह्य- त्वे प्रकृतिभावान्न संधिरित्यन्ये । The Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 1) also expresses the same conclusion, though it offers a different reason for it: नैतेषु सूत्रेषु संधिरनुसंधेयोऽविवक्षितत्वात् । It looks like Kr̥ṣṇadāsa cites the rule from the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa, but derives the explanation for the absence of sandhi from Pāṇinian commentators. 41The term samāna is normally interpreted to mean a simple vowel. Here, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa takes it in the sense of ‘equal.’ In what sense are the five simple vowels equal? This question is answered by saying that each of them has eighteen types of manifestations due to the distinctions of length (3), nasality (2), and accents (3). This is generally not conceded for l̥, which is traditionally said to have short and prolated varieties, but no long varieties. 42There is no such rule in CA. However, compare P.8.2.100 (अनुदात्तं प्रश्नान्ता- भिपूजितयोः) and P.8.2.105 (अनन्त्यस्यापि प्रश्नाख्यानयोः). It is not clear where such additional rules in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s works are coming from. 43See the KV on P.1.3.2 and P.7.1.1. Also the SK on P.1.3.2 (p. 3). The

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 642 मात्राकालः कालः (च.आ. ३.३.३५ अंशः)। उच्चारस्येत्यर्थः । ३८. एकमात्रो ह्रस्वः (च.आ. १.२.१९)। एका मात्रा यस्योच्चारकाले स स्वरो ह्रस्वसंज्ञः स्यात् । ३९. व्यञ्जनानि च (च.आ. १.२.२०)। व्यञ्जनान्यप्येकमात्रोच्चाराणि । चकारात्स्वरहीनान्यर्धमात्राणि ज्ञातव्या- नि44 । ‘व्यञ्जनं चार्धमात्रम्’45 इति केचित् । अत्रैव लघुगुरुलक्षणम् । ४०. ह्रस्वं लघ्वसंयोगे (च.आ. १.२.११)। असंयोगे परे पूर्वं यद्ध्रस्व- मक्षरं तल्लघुसंज्ञं भवति । ४१. गुर्वन्यत् (च.आ. १.२.१२)। ‘ह्रस्वं लघु, संयोगे गुरु, दीर्घं च’ (पा. १.४.१०-१२) गुर्विति पाणिनिः । अत्र शास्त्रे लघुगुरुप्रयोजनाभावः । परन्तु सूत्रचारितार्थ्याय गृह्यते46 । गुर्विति ४२. अनुनासिकं च (च.आ. १.२.१३)। ४३. पदान्ते च (च.आ. १.२.१४)। ४४. परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि (च.आ. १.२.१५)। ४५. संयोगादि पूर्वस्य (च.आ. १.२.१६)। ४६. पद्यं च (च.आ. १.२.१७)। ४७. रेफहकारक्रमजं च (च.आ. १.२.१८)। ‘दीर्घं संयोगपरं तथा स्वरव्यञ्जनान्तमूष्मान्तम् । सानुस्वारं च गुरु क्वचिदवसानेऽपि लघ्वन्त्यम् ॥’47

commentary Tattvabodhinī on SK explains this as: यद्यपि सूत्रकारकृतोऽनुनासिक- पाठ इदानीं परिभ्रष्टः, तथापि वृत्तिकारादिव्यवहारबलेन यथाकार्यं प्राक् स्थित इत्यनुमीयत इति । 44The CA rule says that consonants also have one-mora duration. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa tries to change the meaning of this rule to match the citation which says that consonants have a half-mora duration. 45This seems to be a reference to the commonly cited verse: एकमात्रो भवेद् ह्रस्वो द्विमात्रो दीर्घ उच्यते । त्रिमात्रस्तु प्लुतो ज्ञेयो व्यञ्जनं चार्धमात्रकम् ॥ This is not found in any version of the Pāṇinīyaśikṣā. It is cited in the Sārasvata- Vyākaraṇa (p. 2). 46This is a significant comment. While the CA defines the terms laghu and guru, there is no occasion within the system of CA to purposefully use these terms. In contrast, Pāṇini’s grammar finds purposeful utilization of this distinction, e.g. P.8.2.86 (गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्याप्येकैकस्य प्राचाम्) and P.7.2.7 (अतो हलादेर्लघोः). It is not clear why Kr̥ṣṇadāsa feels compelled to include these rules. 47This verse is also cited with the same reading in Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s Vr̥tti

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका643 इति पिङ्गलः (छन्दःसूत्र, १.४)। ४८. द्विमात्रो दीर्घः (च.आ. १.२. २१)। ४९. त्रिमात्रः प्लुतः (च.आ. १.२.२२)। मात्रोच्चारोदाहरणं तु - ‘चाषस्तु वदते मात्रां द्विमात्रं त्वेव वायसः । शिखी रौति त्रिमात्रं तु नकुलस्त्वर्धमात्रकम् ॥’ इति शिक्षा (पाणिनीयशिक्षा ४९)। कुक्कुटोऽपि मात्रात्रयमेककालाव- च्छेदेन48 पृथक् पृथक् प्रब्रूते । उ१ ऊ२ ऊ३ ॥ अत एव49 पाणिनि- नोक्तम् ‘ऊकालोऽज्झरस्वदीर्घप्लुतः’ (पा. १.२.२७) इति । ५०. समान- यमेऽक्षरमुच्चैरुदात्तं नीचैरनुदात्तमाक्षिप्तं स्वरितम् (च.आ. १.१.१६)। समानः तुल्यश्चासौ यमः50 ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतधर्मश्च तस्मिन् यदुच्चैरुपलभ्यमान- मक्षरं तदुदात्तमित्युच्यते । एवमग्रेऽपि । नीचैरुच्चार्यमाणमनुदात्तम् । उभयधर्मौ आक्षिप्तौ यस्मिन् तत्स्वरितम् । ५१. स्वरितस्यादितो मात्रार्ध- मुदात्तम् (च.आ. १.१.१७)। ‘उच्चैरुदात्तः,’ ‘नीचैरनुदात्तः,’ ‘समा- हारः स्वरितः’ (पा. १.२.२९-३१) इति पाणिनिः । ‘तस्यादित उदात्त- मर्धह्रस्वम्’ (पा. १.२.३२) इति च ।

on CA (1.2.12). For a discussion of the different readings of this verse, see the note on CA (1.2.12). 48The phrase ekakālāvacchedena is somewhat strange in this context. It nor- mally means, ‘within the same time-span.’ In a rooster-call, we here different lengths of u successively, and normally one would not expect the use of the above phrase. 49The notion that Pāṇini chose the vowel u to demonstrate the different dura- tions of short, long, and prolated vowels, because this is naturally seen in the call of a rooster (kukkuṭa), is explicitly stated in the works of Nāgeśabhaṭta. The Br̥hacchabdenduśekhara (vol.I., p. 28) says: कुक्कुटरुते उकार एव एक- मात्रत्वद्विमात्रत्वादीनां प्रसिद्धेरकारादयो नोक्ताः सूत्रकारेण । The same comment in found in Nāgeśabhaṭṭa’s Laghuśabdenduśekhara (p. 82). 50Kr̥ṣṇadāsa takes the term yama to be equivalent of vowel-length. The term actually refers to ‘range of vowel pitch, register.’ For details, see the note on CA (1.1.16).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 644 ‘उदात्तश्चानुदात्तश्च स्वरितश्च स्वरास्त्रयः । आयामविश्रम्भाक्षेपैस्त उच्यन्तेऽक्षराश्रयाः ॥’ इति प्रातिशाख्ये (ऋग्वेदप्रातिशाख्य, ३.१-२; पाणिनीयशिक्षा, श्लोक ११)। ए ऐ ओ औ इत्यत्र ह्रस्वाभावात् प्रत्येकं द्वादशभेदात्तेभ्यः पूर्वोक्त- स्वरेभ्यः किञ्चिदूनत्वात्तत्समानत्वं नेति दिक्51 । तरतमानि सन्ध्य- क्षराणि52 । एषां सन्ध्यक्षराणीति संज्ञा । सन्ध्यक्षरत्वं किम् । पूर्वोक्ताः पञ्च स्वराः पदान्ते एव सन्धिं सम्पादयन्ति । एतानि तु यत्र तत्रापि । नायकः, पावकः, भवतीत्यत्र पदमध्येऽपीत्यर्थः53 । उभये स्वराः । अइउ- ऋऌ ५ एऐओऔ ४ एषां स्वरा इति संज्ञा54 । स्वरत्वं किम् । ५२. स्वरोऽक्षरम् (च.आ. १.४.२)। स्वेनैव राजते न तु पराश्रयेणेति स्वरः । यद्वा उदात्तादिभेदैः स्वर्यते इति स्वरः । अक्षरं न क्षीयते अन्या- श्रयमभिलषते इत्यक्षरम् । स्वर एव पूर्णाक्षरम् । अन्यान्यर्धमात्राणि । ५३. अस्वराणि व्यञ्जनानि (च.आ. ३.३.२६)। स्वरं विना यान्यक्ष- राणि तानि व्यञ्जनानीति संज्ञा । ‘स्वरहीनं व्यञ्जनम्’ (सारस्वत- व्याकरण, p. 3) इति केचित्55 । इमानि स्वरं संप्राप्यैव सुखोच्चाराय

51If the phrase तत्समानत्वं न is used simply to point to the fact that the diphthongs have only twelve varieties each, and therefore they are not equal in regard to the number of varieties with the preceding vowels, this makes sense. However, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is simultaneously attempting to explain why these sounds are not included in the category of samāna vowels. Elsewhere, he attempts to explain the technical term samāna for simple vowels by pointing out that they are samāna ‘equal’ in each having 18 varieties. See his commentary on PS 34: समानत्वं किम् । ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतानुनासिकाननुनासिकोदात्तानुदात्त- स्वरितभेदेन प्रत्येकमेते पञ्च स्वरा अष्टादशधा तुल्यं धर्मं प्राप्नुवन्ति । 52This is most likely a reference to the notion that e and o are vivr̥tatara, while ai and au are vivr̥tatama. See PS rules 25, 59 and 60 below. For a detailed discussion, see the note on CA (1.1.34). 53This is an unusual explanation of the term sandhyakṣara and is not supported by any other text. 54This looks like a direct reflection of the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (1.4, p. 2): ४ उभये स्वराः । अकारादयः पञ्च, एकारादयश्चत्वारश्चोभये स्वरा उच्यन्ते । 55See the comment in the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 3): स्वरहीनं व्यञ्जनम् । स्वरे-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका645 भवन्तीति56 । व्यज्यन्ते स्वरेण स्पष्टीक्रियन्ते इति व्यञ्जनानि । ५४. व्यञ्जनान्येवापेतानि स्वरैः संयोगः (च.आ. १.४.७, पाठान्तरम्)। स्वरैरपेतान्येव व्यञ्जनानि तेषां संयोग इत्यपि च संज्ञा । ‘हलोऽनन्तराः संयोगः’ (पा. १.१.७) इति पाणिनिः । संयुज्यते स्वरेणेति57 । ५५. अ- संवृताः स्वराः नामिनः58 (not found in CA)। अकारः संवृतः तं विनाऽन्ये स्वरा नामिन उच्यन्ते । नामित्वं किम् । नामसंबन्धिषु स्वादिषु विभक्तिषु प्रक्रियाः संपाद्यन्ते यैस्ते नामिनः59 । अं अः इत्यत्र प्रक्रिया- कालेषु अकारस्यापि विवृतत्वमस्त्येव । अकारेण केवलेन विभक्तिरिति क्वापि न सम्भाव्यते । ‘अवर्जा नामिनः’60 (सारस्वतव्याकरण १.५) इति केचित् । अकारान्तपुंलिङ्गसंबोधने तु विभक्तिलोपः न विभक्तिरिति । ५६. सस्थानकरणं सवर्णम्61 (not found in CA)। तुल्यं स्थानं करणं च

भ्योऽन्यत् स्वरहीनम् । अन्यथा स्वरेषु स्वरो नास्तीति तेषां स्वराणामपि व्यञ्जनता स्यात् । 56The original CA rules 3.3.26-7 appear in the context of a discussion of whether consonants have accents (svara). Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, perhaps under the influence of the cited Sārasvata-Vyākarana statement, takes the term svara to refer to vowels, rather than to accents. 57This interpretation of saṃyoga as conjunction with a vowel is not supported by any text in Sanskrit grammar or phonetics. 58This definition is inaccurate, because it does not exclude ā from the scope of the term nāmin. The vowel ā is not saṃvr̥ta, and yet it must be excluded from the scope of the term nāmin. 59The term nāmin has nothing to do with nāman, as alleged by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa. It is derived from the causative form namayati in the sense of ‘to bring about change.’ See: K.C. Chatterji (1948, 1964). 60This rule is interpreted in the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa as: अवर्णवर्जाः स्वराः नामिन उच्यन्ते । This properly excludes both a and ā from the scope of nāmin, since both of them are covered by the term avarṇa. 61The wording of this rule is indeed intriguing, unless the word karaṇa is used in the sense of prayatna ‘effort, manner,’ and not in the sense of ‘articulator.’ The possibility that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa means prayatna by the term karaṇa is en- hanced by his gloss on PS 20 (= CA 1.1.29) above, where the term karaṇa is glossed by prayatna. This would make this definition identical with that offered by Pāṇini 1.1.9 (तुल्यास्यप्रयत्नं सवर्णम्). If the term karaṇa were to mean ‘articulator,’ there are very few parallels in the grammatical literature. One

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 646 यस्य येन तत् सवर्णसंज्ञं स्यात् । ५७. वर्णैक्यं संहिता (not found in CA)। वर्णानां यदैक्यमेकीभवनं तत् संहितेति संज्ञा । ‘परः सन्निकर्षः संहिता’ (पा. १.४.१०९) इति पाणिनिः । स्थानप्रयत्नबलात्स्वरैः सह व्यञ्जनानां सावर्ण्यं प्राप्तम् । ५८. नैकारौकारयोः स्थानविधौ (च.आ. १.१.४१) इति सूत्रे ह्रस्वदीर्घप्लुतानां स्वराणां परसन्निकर्षणात् अइएऐ- उओऔ एभिर्व्यञ्जनानां सन्धौ सावर्ण्यं नेति निषेधः ।62 ‘नाज्झलौ’ (पा. १.१.१०) इति पाणिनिः । मित्रवदागमः63 । प्रत्ययश्च64 । शत्रुवदा- देशः65 । आगमादेशबलात्तु कार्यं सिध्यति । नित्यादपवादो बलीयानि- ति66 । सामान्याद्विशेषोऽपि । ५९. विवृततरौ गुणः (not found in

such parallel is found in the Varṇaratnapradīpikāśikṣā, verse 38, Śikṣā- saṃgraha (p. 120): यद्यद्यस्य भवेत्स्थानं करणं वा विशेषणम् । सवर्णत्वेन संग्राह्य आस्ययत्नस्तु भिद्यते ॥ Also compare the definition given in VPR (1.13): समानस्थानकरणास्यप्रयत्नः सवर्णः which uses the notion of karaṇa besides āsyaprayatna. For a detailed discus- sion of issues involved, see: Deshpande (1975: 94ff, 104ff, and 118-119). 62This is indeed a very unlikely interpretation. It is difficult to see how one can extract all the listed vowels, i.e. a, i, e, ai, u, o, and au, including all the short, long, and extra long varieties from the expression naikāraukārayoḥ. Also it is difficult to see how the rule can be additionally made to say that vowels are not homogeneous with consonants. Bhārgava-Bhāskara’s commentary also offers a different, but an equally unlikely explanation. See the notes on CA (1.1.41). 63Identical with Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (1.19, p. 4). 64The Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa does not extend the analogy of mitravat to pratyayas. This may be Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s innovation. The behavior shared by the augments and affixes is that they are both add-on elements, and do not re- place anything. 65Identical with Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (1.20, p. 4). Kshitish Chandra Chatterji (1948, 1964: 317) quotes a parallel verse: स्थाने शत्रुवदादेशा भाले पुण्ड्रवदागमाः । दन्तानामिव लोपः स्याच्छत्रवत्प्रत्ययाः परे ॥ 66Compare Paribhāṣā (Paribhāṣenduśekhara 38: पूर्वपरनित्यान्तरङ्गापवादानामुत्तरोत्तरं बलीयः).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका647 CA)। विवृततरौ एओकारौ गुणसंज्ञौ स्तः67 । ६०. विवृततमा वृद्धिः (not found in CA)। आऐऔकारा विवृततमा वृद्धिसंज्ञाः स्युः68 । ६१. द्रव्यार्थादेशा धातवः (not found in CA)। द्रव्याणां विषयाणामर्था- नुपदिशन्ति ते । ‘भूवादयो धातवः’ (पा. १.३.१) इति पाणिनिः संज्ञ- पते । ६२. साधकतमा विभक्तिः (not found in CA)। विभक्तिरेवार्थान् संपादयति । ६३. पदान्तः पद्यः (च.आ. १.१.५)। ‘सुप्तिङन्तं पदम्’ (पा. १.४.१४) इति पाणिनिः । पद्यते संपद्यतेऽर्थोऽनेनेति भावः । ‘वि- भक्तयन्तं पदम्’ (सारस्वतव्याकरण १२१) इति केचित्69 । कमीमिद्वि- ति70 निपाता एकस्वराश्च71 । निपाता धात्वर्थरञ्जका अनेकार्थाश्च72 । ६४. प्रपरेत्युपसर्गाः73 (cf. च.आ. ४.१.१९)। धातूनां संयोगेऽ- र्थान्तरगमकाः । ६५. अभीत्यन्ता उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे गतिस्तथा

67PS rule 59 and the commentary exclude a from the list of guṇa vowels, cf. P.1.1.2 (अदेङ् गुणः). The featural description vivr̥tatara can apply to e and o within the system as understood by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, but not to a, which is a close (saṃvr̥ta) vowel. 68This rule and the commentary presumably try to lump ai, au, and ā together as vivr̥tatama vowels. The CA (1.1.34-35) distinguish between the degree of openness for ai and au on the one hand, and ā on the other. The vowel ā is treated by the CA as being even more open than ai and au, which are described as vivr̥tatama. 69Also compare: ते विभक्तयन्ताः पदम्, न्यायसूत्र, २.२.५१. 70Compare Yāska’s Nirukta (1.9): अथ ये प्रवृत्तेऽर्थेऽमिताक्षरेषु ग्रन्थेषु वाक्यपूरणा आग- च्छन्ति पदपूरणास्ते मिताक्षरेष्वनर्थकाः कमीमिद्विति. The same list is referred to in Br̥haddevatā (2.91) which explicitly refers to these items as nipātas in (2.89). 71While the nipātas cited here have one vowel each (ekasvarāḥ), it is not exactly clear why this qualification has been mentioned here. It almost seems like a reflex of the words nipāta ekāc of P.1.1.14 (निपात एकाजनाङ्). 72The wording of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is confusing at best. The Nirukta (1.9) and Br̥haddevatā (2.90-91) say that the nipātas like kam, īm, it, and u are mean- ingless (anarthakāḥ), but that “there are also such particles as have various senses (anekārthāḥ), e.g. iva, na, cid, and nu - these are the four having the sense of comparison” (Br̥haddevatā 2.91). 73Compare Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (355, p. 75): प्रादिरुपसर्गः, and the list of Upa- sargas begins with pra, parā etc.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 648 (च.आ. ४.१.२०cd)। ‘उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे, गतिश्च’ (पा. १.४.५९- ६०) इति पाणिनिः । ६६. विकल्पो विभाषा (not found in CA)। ६७. अवसानं विरामोऽन्तश्च (not found in CA)। वर्णाभावे विरामादि- संज्ञा74 । ६८. वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा (च.आ. १.४.१)। अन्त्याद्वर्ण- मात्रात्पूर्वो यो वर्णः स उपधेति । ६९. अन्त्यः स्वरः सोत्तरावयवष्टिः75 (not found in CA)। ७०. प्रत्यये व्यञ्जनमित् (not found in CA)। ७१. उपरिष्टाद् बिन्दुरनुस्वारः76 (not found in CA)। ७२. पार्श्वबिन्दु- द्वयो विसर्गः (not found in CA)। ७३. अᳲकᳲपौ जिह्वामूलीयो- पध्मानीयौ (not found in CA)। ७४. ईऊए द्विवचने प्रगृह्यम् (not found in CA)। ७५. वर्णकार्यादर्शनं लोपः (not found in CA)। ७६. विसर्जनीयोऽभिनिष्ठा(ष्टा?)नः (च.आ. १.२.१)। ७७. व्यञ्जनवि- धारणमभिनिधानः (च.आ. १.२.२)। पूर्वसूत्राणि स्पष्टार्थानि । व्यञ्जनविधारणं संयोगस्याद्यक्षरमभि[नि]धानसंज्ञं स्यात् । ७८. स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शे पदान्तावग्रहयोश्च (च.आ. १.२.४-५)। ७९. लकारस्योष्मसु (च.आ. १.२.६)। ८०. ङणनानां हकारे (च.आ. १.२.७)। ८१. आस्थापितं च (च.आ. १.२.८)। ८२. अतोऽन्यत्संयुक्तम् (च.आ. १.२.९)। ८३. स्पर्शेषु सस्थानः स्ववर्गः (not found in CA)। वर्ग इति संज्ञा । ८४. अविभक्ति नाम प्रातिपदिकं च77 (not found in

74Compare: P.1.4.110 (विरामोऽवसानम्), and SK on it: वर्णानामभावोऽवसानसंज्ञः स्यात्। 75Compare Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (26, p. 5): अन्त्यस्वरादिष्टिः । 76This rule and the next one, interestingly offer a graphic, rather than a phonetic, description of the Anusvāra and the Visarga. Compare Sārasvata- Vyākaraṇa (32, p. 4): वर्णशिरोबिन्दुरनुस्वारः । The Pāṇinian grammarians gener- ally do not offer graphic descriptions of sounds. However, occasionally this does happen. For jihvāmūlīya and upadhmānīya sounds, the SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 6) says: ᳲकᳲपाविति कपाभ्यां प्रागर्धविसर्गसदृशौ जिह्वामूलीयोपध्मानीयौ। Commen- ting on this line, the Tattvabodhinī says: सादृश्यमुच्चारणे लेखने च बोध्यम् । 77This looks like an effort to combine Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (122: अविभक्ति नाम) with the Pāṇinian term prātipadika for the nominal stem, cf. P.1.2.45 (अर्थवदधातुरप्रत्ययः प्रातिपदिकम्). The commentary excludes nipātas and upa- sargas from the scope of this term. This is not the case with Pāṇinian rules.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका649 CA)। विभक्तिरहितं निपातोपसर्गवर्जितं नामेति संज्ञा प्रातिपदिकमिति च । ८५. सर्वादीनि सर्वनाम78 (not found in CA)इति । ८६. अना- ख्यातं कृदन्तम्79 (not found in CA)इति । इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्स- व्याकरणे संज्ञाप्रकरणम् ॥ परिभाषाप्रकरणम् ८७. स्थानार्था षष्ठी80 (not found in CA)। षष्ठीनिर्दिष्टं कार्यं तस्यैव स्थाने बोध्यम् । ८८. पञ्चम्युत्तरस्य81 (not found in CA)। ८९. सप्तमी पूर्वस्य82 (not found in CA)। ९०. आद्यन्तानि टवर्गक- वर्गव्यञ्जनानि83 (not found in CA)। ९१. असिद्धं बहिरङ्गमन्तरङ्गे (not found in CA)। विनाशोन्मुखं कार्यं न कुर्यात् । ९२. इतो लोपः (not found in CA)। इत्संज्ञकस्येत्यर्थः । ९३. विधायकस्य न84 (not

It appears that this exclusion is to make this rule compatible with the Prāti- śākhya tradition which distinguishes nominal stems from the categories of nipāta and upasarga, cf. CA (1.1.2: चतुर्णां पदजातानां नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातानां सन्ध्यपद्यौ गुणौ प्रातिज्ञम्). For further details, see: Deshpande (1992: 10-15). 78This looks like an incomplete expression, since the plural of sarvādīni does not match the singular of sarvanāma. Compare P.1.1.27 (सर्वादीनि सर्वनामानि). However, the singular usage is more in accordance with Sārasvata- Vyākaraṇa (148: सर्वादेः स्मट्) and सर्वादिः सर्वनामाख्यः in a verse cited in the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 23). 79Compare P.3.1.93 (कृदतिङ्). 80Compare P.1.1.49 (षष्ठी स्थानेयोगा). 81Compare P.1.1.67 (तस्मादित्युत्तरस्य). 82Compare P.1.1.66 (तस्मिन्निति निर्दिष्टे पूर्वस्य). 83Compare P.1.1.46 (आद्यन्तौ टकितौ). The rule as stated by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa refers to ṭa-varga and ka-varga, rather than just the marker consonants ṭ and k. 84The term apratyayaḥ in P.1.1.69 (अणुदित्सवर्णस्य चाप्रत्ययः) is interpreted by Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita in his SK on this rule as being equal to avidhīyamānaḥ. This is interpreted to mean that an item which is prescribed is not capable of representing its homogeneous sounds. Historically, such an interpretation goes back to the MB of Patañjali who derives the maxim भाव्यमानेन सवर्णानां ग्रहणं न. For a detailed discussion of this maxim, see: Deshpande (1975:

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 650 found in CA)। ९४. वर्णग्रहे सवर्णमात्रम्85 (not found in CA)। ९५. कारे सत्यसहवर्णोः86 (?, not found in CA)। व्यञ्जनानां परैः संयोगः कार्यः संहितायाम्87 । इति परिभाषाप्रकरणम् ॥ [सन्धिसाधनम्?]88 ९६. संयोगे पूर्वं व्यञ्जनं पूर्वमुत्तरमुत्तरम् (not found in CA)। ९७. पूर्वं रेफश्चेत्स ऊर्ध्वगः89 (not found in CA)। [स्वरसन्धिप्रकरणम्] अथ स्वरसन्धिः । अभ्यागतः पूज्य इत्यत्र अभि आगत इति स्थितौ ९८. संहितायाम् (च.आ. २.१.१) इत्यधिकृत्य । ९९. स्वरे

71ff). This notion manifests in different grammars as a distinct rule, and the rule विधायकस्य न in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work is in all likelihood a statement expressing this notion. Compare Bhoja’s Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa, rule 1.2.4 (अविधीयमानोऽण् ससवर्णः). 85Compare: Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 6): वर्णग्रहणे सवर्णग्रहणम् । 86While the reading here is corrupt, the component asaha may be compared with the expression kevala in Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (p. 6): कारग्रहणे केवल- ग्रहणम्. The rule probably means: “A letter appended with the affix -kāra does not stand for the associated sounds, i.e. stands just for itself.” 87This statement probably belongs to the next section, introducing rule PS 96. 88I am not sure about this section. The text says earlier that there is a section titled sandhisādhanam between the paribhāṣā section and the svarasandhi or svarasādhana section. However, it is strange to find just two rules, without any indication of the beginning or the end of the section. 89Compare the graphic description of repha found in the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (pp. 7-8): तुम्बिका तृणकाष्ठं च तैलं जलसमागमे । ऊर्ध्वस्थानं समायान्ति रेफाणामीदृशी गतिः ॥ जलतुम्बिकान्यायेन रेफस्योर्ध्वगमनम् - रेफः स्वरपरं वर्णं दृष्ट्वारोहति तच्छिरः । पुरःस्थितं यदा पश्येदधः संक्रमते स्वरम् ॥

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका651 नामिनोऽन्तस्थाः (च.आ. ३.२.१६)। पदान्ते इत्यनुवृत्तिः । सन्ध्यक्षरं विना नामिसंज्ञस्य स्वरस्य स्थाने स्वरसंज्ञे वर्णे परेऽन्तस्था भवन्ति । अन्तस्थाश्चतस्रः तासां मध्यात् कस्याः प्राप्तिरत्र । यो यस्य सस्थानः स एव सन्धिविषये प्राप्तुं शक्नोति नान्यः । आगमादेशकाले तु विशेषस्य बल- वत्त्वात् । अतः सस्थानत्वबलादिकारस्य स्थाने यकारः । अभ्य् इति स्थिते । १००. पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विः (च.आ. ३.२.१) इत्यनुसृत्य । १०१. संयोगादि स्वरात् (च.आ. ३.२.३)। स्वरात् संयोगसंज्ञस्य वर्णस्यादिभूतं यद् व्यञ्जनं तद् द्विः स्यात् इति भकारस्य द्वित्वम् । १०२. पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विः (च.आ. ३.२.१)। पदान्ते यद् व्यञ्जनं तद् द्विः स्यात् । अत्र इकारस्थाने यकारः पदान्ते तस्यापि द्वित्वम् । तदा अभ्भ्य्य् इति स्थितम् । यकारस्य स्वरस्य सस्थानत्वमाशङ्क्य90 । नेत्यनु- वृत्त्या १०३. सस्थाने च (च.आ. ३.२.७)। स्वराणां सस्थाने व्यञ्जने परे संयोगो द्विर्न भवति । इति द्वित्वनिषेधे प्राप्ते १०४. न समौ सन्ध्यौ (cf. च.आ. ३.२.१४)। सन्धिस्थसन्धिस्थानादेशीयवर्णौ समानधर्मौ न स्तः इति स्थानिशङ्कानिरासः । १०५. तृतीयान्तानि (from च.आ. १.१.१०)इत्यनुवर्त्त्य । १०६. अधिस्पर्शं च (च.आ. १.१.११)। स्पर्शाक्षरात्पूर्वं स्पर्शाक्षरमधिस्पर्शं तदपि तृतीयान्तं स्यात् संयोगे परे अनेन पूर्वभकारस्य बकारः । तदा ब्भ्य्य् इति जाते । पुनर्द्वित्वे प्राप्ते । लोप

90In the stage abh-bh-y + āgataḥ, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa argues that one may suspect that y is followed by a sasthāna ‘homorganic’ vowel ā, and then deny reduplication to y by PS 103. This argument is based on several assumptions. The first assumption is that the substitute y can be treated as having the same features as the original i, cf. sthānivadbhāva in Pāṇini, which, however, contains the restriction analvidhau in P.1.1.56. Even if y is treated as having the same features as i, how can it be treated as being sasthāna ‘homorganic’ with ā? This cannot happen in any other system, except the one set up by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa. He, on PS 2, argues that all vowels are minimally kaṇṭhya, and that vowels other than a and ā may have a second point of articulation, cf. स्वरहकारविसर्जनीयानां कण्ठः and नामिस्वराणां प्रत्येकं स्थानद्वयम्. This allows the possibility of i and ā being treated as sasthāna. No other system of grammar known to me would support such a position.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 652 इत्यनुवर्त्त्य १०७. स्पर्शादुत्तमादनुत्तमस्यानुत्तमे (च.आ. २.१.२०)। स्पृष्टप्रयत्नमात्राद्वर्णात् प्रथमाद् द्विरुक्तिविषयेऽपरस्य व्यञ्जनस्य स्थानेऽपर- स्मिन् सजातीये व्यञ्जने प्राप्ते सति लोपः स्यादिति पुनर्द्वित्वप्रतिषेधः91 । १०८. लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य (च.आ. २.१.२४)। स्पर्शम- धिकृत्येत्यधिस्पर्शो यस्मिन्नित्यधिस्पर्शं सजातीयस्य लेशमात्रे वर्तनं यस्येदृशो लोपः स्यादिति शाकटायनस्य मतम्92 । ‘सरूपाणामेकशेष’ … (पा. १. २.६४) इति पाणिनिः93 । तेन द्वितीयस्य यकारस्य लोपो वा । तत्र ब्भ्य् [and ब्भ्य्य्] इति रूपद्वयस्थितौ । १०९. व्यञ्जनं परतः सन्ध- येत्94 (not found in CA)। तदा सन्धौ अब्भ्यागतः । अब्भ्य्यागतः । सरूपैकशेषे95 भकारद्वयस्य सारूप्येऽभ्यागत इति रूपत्रयं सिद्धम् । रूपचतुष्टयं96 च यकारद्वयेन । अभ्य्यागत इति । सर्वत्र शाकल्यस्य97 मतेन द्वित्वं न । गौरि एहि इत्यत्र यकारादेशः पूर्ववत् । रेफस्य द्वित्वे प्राप्ते । ११०. रेफहकारौ परं ताभ्याम् (च.आ. ३.२.८)। ताभ्यां व्यञ्जनस्वराभ्यां रेफहकारौ द्विर्न स्तः इति परम् । पूर्वस्मात् शास्त्रात्परं

91Contrast the more standard interpretations of CA (2.1.20). The rule applies to a situation where an uttama ‘list-final’ nasal consonant is followed by one of the first four members (= non-list-final) of the stop-series. Under no circumstances can the rule apply to the sequence b-bh-y-y. 92The rule does not say that the consonant under consideration is deleted according to Śākaṭāyana, but that it has a reduced articulation. P.8.3.18 (व्योर्लघुप्रयत्नतरः शाकटायनस्य) and P.8.3.19 (लोपः शाकल्यस्य) clearly distinguish between these alternatives. The deletion alternative is ascribed to Śākalya. 93Kr̥ṣṇadāsa implies that this rule of Pāṇini also applies to phonology, so that a sequence of two identical consonants could be reduced to a single consonant. The original context of the rule does not have anything to do with phonology. 94Compare Cāndravyākaraṇa (36: स्वरहीनं परेण संयोज्यम्) and Kātantravyākaraṇa (1.1.21: व्यञ्जनमस्वरं परं वर्णं नयेत्). 95This repeats the view that P.1.2.64 (सरूपाणामेकशेष एकविभक्तौ) teaches that a cluster of two identical consonants can be reduced to a single consonant. 96Compare the SK on P.8.2.23, referring to the sandhi of sudhī+upāsyaḥ : तदिह धकारयकारयोर्द्वित्वविकल्पाच्चत्वारि रूपाणि । एकधमेकयम् । द्विधं द्वियम् । द्विधमेकयम्। एकधं द्वियम् । 97This refers to P.8.4.51 (सर्वत्र शाकल्यस्य).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका653 शास्त्रं बलवत् । ‘विप्रतिषेधे परं कार्यम्’ (पा. १.४.२) इति पाणिनिः । अनेन रेफस्य द्वित्वं न । अन्यत्पूर्ववत् । गौर्येहीति सिद्ध(K: द्धिं)म् । मह्यम्बेति मही अम्बा अत्र हकारस्यापि सूत्रबलाद् द्वित्वं न । वधू आननमित्यत्र ऊ(K: उ)कारस्थानेऽन्तस्थानां मध्याद्वकार एव प्राप्तः ऊ(K: उ)कारवकारयोः सस्थानत्वादू(K: दु)कारस्य वकारः । द्वित्वादि पूर्ववत् । वध्वाननं सिद्धम् । मध्वरिरिति । पितॄ(K: तृ)णामाज्यमन्नं वा पितृअन्नम् [पित्]ऋआज्यम् । ऋकारस्य रेफः पित्र् परसंयोजनात् पित्रन्नम् । विकल्पात्98 पित्राज्यम् । द्विर्न । [पित्]राज्यमिति सिद्धम् । १११. ऋवर्णरेफषकारेभ्यः समानपदे नो णः (च.आ. ३.४.१)। एभ्यः एक- पदाश्रये नकारस्य णत्वं स्यात् । ऋअनम् रणम् ऋआवनः रावणः99 । बृंहणम् सर्पणम् । अर्चनम् दर्शनम् रटनम् इत्यत्र नकारानुवर्तनात् । ११२. व्यवाये शषलैः (च.आ. ३.४.२५)। ११३. चटतवर्गैश्च (च.आ. ३.४.२६)। एभिर्व्यवधानात् णत्वं नेति । रेफस्य दन्तमूल- त्वात् लकारस्यापि दन्त्यत्वात् । ११४. लकारस्य रेफः पादम् … (च.आ. १.३.४)। इति सूत्रबलाद्रेफलकारयोर्ऋऌवर्णयोः [च] साव- र्ण्यम् । तेन ऌअवनम् लवनं100 लवणं च ऌअवनम् इत्यत्रान्तस्था- मध्याल्लकारादेशः परेण स्वरेण योगाल्लवनमिति सिद्धम् । लम्भनम् रम्भणम् च रलयोः सावर्ण्यात् । शाकलानां मूर्धन्यलकारोच्चारणात् डलयोरप्य- भेदः । दुर्दभ इत्यत्र दुरो रेफात्परस्य दकारस्य मूर्धन्यादेशं डकारं कृत्वा डकारस्य रेफलकाराभ्यां सस्थानत्वं मत्वा ‘रो रि’ (पा. ८.३.१४) इति- वद्रेफस्य लोपे पूर्वस्योकारस्य दैर्घ्यमालक्ष्य ‘परि॑ ते दू॒ळभो॒ रथ॑’ (ऋग्वेद ४.९.८a) इति पठन्ति । स्वरे (from च.आ. ३.२.१६)इत्यनुवर्त्त्य

98This probably refers to the two possible forms pittrājyam and pitrājyam. 99The etymologies of the words raṇa and rāvaṇa are intriguing. 100Generally, the word lavanaṃ is derived from the verb lu plus the affix ana, and not from a combination of l̥+avana. The Pāṇinian commentators look at lavaṇa as an irregular formation sanctioned by its inclusion in the nandyādi- gaṇa, cf. P.3.1.134 (नन्दिग्रहिपचादिभ्यो ल्युणिन्यचः), and the SK (p. 488) on this rule: नन्द्यादिगणे निपातनाण्णत्वम्.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 654 ११५. सन्ध्यक्षराणामयवायावः (च.आ. ३.२.१७)। एओऐऔ एतेषां सन्ध्यक्षराणां स्थाने विवृततरविवृततमक्रमेण अय् अव् आय् आव् एते प्रत्ययाः101 संभवन्ति प्रत्येतीति प्रत्ययः । वर्णं प्रति यातीत्यर्थः । ११६. प्रत्ययव्यञ्जनमित् (not found in CA)प्रत्यये यद् व्यञ्जनं तदित्स्यात् । ११७. इतो लोपः (not found in CA) इति यवयोर्लोपे प्राप्ते ११८. विधायकस्य न (not found in CA)। कार्यं विधीयतेऽनेनेति विधायकः । तस्य लोपो न । यवयोर्लोपे तु अयावादिविधानमपि न सिद्ध्येत्102 । वे उ न इति स्थिते । वे इत्यस्य एकारस्य स्थाने अय्प्रत्ययो जातः । तदा व् अय् उ नम् इति परसंयोगात् वयुनं नयनमिति सिद्धम् । गवां सादृश्यमेतीति गवयः कश्चित् पशुः । गो अयः इत्यत्र ओकारस्य स्थाने अव् । परेण योगात् गवय इति सिद्धिः । भो अनं भवनम् । हो अनं हवनम् । रायो धनस्य आप्तिः रै आप्तिः । अत्राय्प्रत्ययः रै इत्यत्र रेफा- दुत्तरस्य ऐकारस्य तदा र् आय् आप्तिः इति स्थिते परैर्योगे रायाप्तिः सिद्धा । नै अकः नायकः दायकः वायक इति । श्रौ अकः इत्यत्र औकारस्य आव्, तदा श्र् आव् अकः योगः पूर्ववत् । श्रावकः धावकः103 पावकः । इति सिद्धम् । ११९. गोरगर्धं पूर्णं च स्वहव्ये यत्प्रत्ययेऽक्षेन्द्राध्वनि च अजिनाग्रयोर्विभाषा104 (not found in CA)। गोशब्दात् स्वाङ्गजे हव्ये

101Here the term pratyaya is used in the sense of a substitute (ādeśa), and not in the sense of an affix. K.C. Chatterji (1948, 1964: 91ff) surveys the various meanings of this term in the grammatical literature, but has not found any usage of the term in the sense of substitute. 102The question of why the y and v at the end of the substitutes ay, av, āy, and āv are not deleted is of importance even in the Pāṇinian system, cf. SK on P.6.1.78 (एचोऽयवायावः) and P.1.3.9 (तस्य लोपः) इति यवयोर्लोपो न । उच्चारण- सामर्थ्यात् । एवं चेत्संज्ञापीह न भवति । 103This assumes a derivation from dhau+aka. Such a possibility occurs even in the Pāṇinian system which prescribes the substitute dhau for the verb root sr̥, cf. P.7.3.78 (पाघ्राध्मास्थाम्नादाण्दृश्यर्तिसर्तिशदसां पिबजिघ्रधमतिष्ठमनयच्छपश्यर्च्छधौशीय- सीदाः) 104In the Pāṇinian tradition, the forms derived by this rule are derived by a number of different rules, cf. P.6.1.79 (वान्तो यि प्रत्यये), P. 6.1.122 (सर्वत्र

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका655 तत्रैव यत्प्रत्ययेऽध्वपरिमाणजे यकारे परे च अगागमः ककारः स्थानप्रदेशार्थ इत् । अकार उच्चारणार्थो वा । अत्र सरूपाणामेकशेषत्वादर्धस्याकारस्य पूर्णस्याकारस्यापि कार्यमतः कार्यद्वयं दृश्यते । यकारे परेऽर्धस्य स्वरे तु पूर्णस्य । १२०. अकारस्यार्धं चतुर्थमित्येके … (च.आ. १.४.१०) इति सूत्रबलात् न दीर्घत्वं पूर्णत्वाभावात् । १२१. रेफादूष्मणि स्वरपरे स्वरभक्तिरकारस्यार्धं चतुर्थमित्येके (च.आ. १.४.१०)। रेफात् स्वर- परे स्वरः परो यस्य तस्मिन्नूष्मणि स्वरभक्तिः नाम स्वरभागः संयोगः अकारस्यार्धं चतुर्थांशं वा । १२२. अन्यस्मिन् व्यञ्जने चतुर्थमष्टमं वा (च.आ. १.४.११)। इति अकारार्धे गो अ् (K: अ) यम् इति स्थिते ओकारे अव्प्रत्ययः तदा ग् अव् अ्105 यम् जातं संयोगात् गव्यं सिद्धम् । क्रोशद्वयं गव्यूतिः । पूर्णे स्वरे तु ग् अव् अ अक्षः संयोजनात् सवर्णे दीर्घात् गवाक्ष इति सिद्धम् । गवाजिनम् । गवाग्रमित्यपि । विकल्पे गोजिनम् गोग्रमिति । १२३. अजिनाग्रयोर्विभाषेति नौधात्वोश्चार्धम्106 (not found in CA)। नौ च धातुश्च तयोः परतः यप्रत्यये अर्धाकारागमेन

विभाषा गोः), P.6.1.123 (अवङ् स्फोटायनस्य), P.6.1.124 (इन्द्रे च), and the Vārttikas: गोर्यूतौ छन्दस्युपसङ्ख्यानम् and अध्वपरिमाणे च on P.6.1.79. What distinguishes Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s statement is that there is some notion of a half and a full a. As the following discussion shows, he assumes that in the formation gavyam, at the stage go+ya, there is a reduced a as an end-augment after go, i.e. goa+ya. The reduced a allows the change of go to gav. The reduced a is like the svarabhakti. This is a distinctive interpretation, and differs significantly from Pāṇini’s procedure in P.6.1.79 (वान्तो यि प्रत्यये), which prescribes the change of go to gav before a y-initial affix. It may perhaps indicate occasional tri- syllabic pronunciation of words like gavyam and nāvyam in the AV tradition. Wackernagel, Altindische Grammatik, Vol.I., p. 201ff. discusses the vari- ation of the suffixal elements -ya and -iya. However, the tradition here may indicate a different, more a-like pronunciation of the initial vocalic element, e.g. gavaya rather than gaviya. While the original CA does not have this view, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is certainly citing this from some as yet unknown source. 105The manuscript K uses the ligature अ् to indicate the half or reduced a (akā- rārdha). 106The term ardham here again refers to the notion of akārārdham which has been explained in the notes above.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 656 नावा तार्यं नाव्यम् । लाव्यमिति ओकारात् लव्यम् । १२४. पूर्व- परयोरेकः (च.आ. ३.२.१८)। पूर्वपरयोः स्वरयोः स्थाने एकाधि- काररूपस्य स्वरस्यादेशः स्यात् । १२५. पूर्वस्यान्ते परस्यादौ107 (not found in CA)। इत्यधिकृत्य १२६. समानाक्षरस्य सवर्णे दीर्घः (च.आ. ३.२.१९)। समानसंज्ञिकस्य स्वरस्य स्थाने सवर्णे स्वरे परे सति द्वयोरपि स्थाने दीर्घरूप एकादेशः । रेफे ऋकारः ऌकारो दीर्घो न भवति प्लुतो भवति108 । कृष्ण अवलम्ब इत्यत्रोभयोर्ह्रस्वयोरकारयोः दीर्घे आकारादेशे कृष्णावलम्ब इति सिद्धम् । वेदाध्ययनं दैवाधीनमित्यपि च । ह्रस्वादकाराद्दीर्घे आकारे परे सति संयोगे त्रिमात्रत्वं प्लुतत्वमाशङ्क्य । १२७. आकारः केवलः प्रथमं पूर्वेण (च.आ. ३.२.१५)। इति पठति स्म । आकारः प्रथममिति पदादिश्चेत्पूर्वेण ह्रस्वेन(K: ण) अकारेण संयोगं प्राप्य केवलः नामस्वरूपेण दैर्घ्येणैवावतिष्ठते109 । न त्रिमात्रत्वमेति । एवं दिक्प्रदर्शनेन ह्रस्वात् पूर्वोऽप्याकारः संयोगे ज्ञातव्यः । एवमेव ईऊॠ(K: ऋ)कारा ज्ञातव्याः । १२८. कार्ये प्लुतः (not found in CA)। प्लुतकार्यं भिन्नं तत्रैव प्लुतो भवितुमर्हति110 । प्लुतकार्यमग्रे प्रवक्ष्यामः । १२९. सीमन्ते ह्रस्वः (च.आ. ३.२.२०)। सीमन्तादिगणे सावर्ण्य- संयोगे प्राप्तेऽप्यकारो ह्रस्वः । टेर्लोपात् । ‘सीमन्तः केशभागे स्यात्सारङ्गः पशुपक्षिणोः । मार्तण्डोऽर्कोऽञ्जलीषान्धुः कुलटादौ टिलोपतः ॥’ (source?)

107Compare P.6.1.85 (अन्तादिवच्च). 108This statement is not very clear, but seems to refer to the possible homo- geneity of r and r̥ on the one hand, and r̥ and l̥ on the other. 109This interpretation strays substantially from the intent of CA (3.2.15). PS 126 (= CA 3.2.19) specifically says that the combination of two similar simple vowels results in a long vowel, and there is no reason to suspect that it could become a prolonged (pluta) vowel. 110Compare the Vārttika cited in the MB on P.1.2.17: प्लुतश्च विषये स्मृतः, and Patañjali’s explanation: विषये प्लुत उच्यते यदा च स विषयो भवितव्यमेव तदा प्लुतेन.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका657 सीमन् अन्तः, मनस् ईषा । पतत् अञ्जलिः अकारस्योत्तरावयवः अन् अस् अत् इति अनेन सह लोपात् पत (पत्?) अञ्जलिरिति पदान्ताभावात् संयोगे दत्वं नेति सिद्धम् । पाणिनीयाः शकन्ध्वादौ पररूपं विधाय टेः अन्त्यस्य पृषोदरत्वाल्लोपं मन्यन्ते111 । ह्रस्वयोरिकारयोर्योगे कवीन्द्रः । पूर्वे दीर्घे करीन्द्रः । उकाराभ्यां भानूदयः । भानूर्ध्व(K: र्द्धं)म् । वधूच्छि- ष्टम् । ऋकारस्तु स्वतोऽर्धमात्रः । र(K: ऋ)कारद्वययोगादेका मात्रा

111This refers to Vārttika (शकन्ध्वादिषु च) on P.6.1.94. However, the citation of the examples sīmantaḥ, manīṣā, and patañjali indicates a close relationship to the SK on P.1.1.64 (p. 21). Also see Prakriyākaumudī of Rāmacandra (Vol. I, p. 64) on P.6.1.94 for the same examples. The final comment is even more closely comparable to the Prauḍhamanoramā on SK (p. 194): केचित्तु मनःपत- च्छब्दयोः पृषोदरादित्वादन्त्यलोपेऽकारस्यैव पररूपमाहुः । It is clear that Bhaṭṭoji refers to this view as a rejected view, and this is made clear by Haridīkṣita in his commentary Laghuśabdaratna : अत्रारुचिबीजं तु वचनद्वयव्यापारो व्यर्थः, पृषोदरादि- त्वाट्टिलोपेनैव सिद्धेरिति ।. N.D. Wadegaonkar, in his Marathi translation of Prauḍhamanoramā and Śabdaratna (Vol. 3, pp. 132-3), identifies the view being rejected as that of Śrīkr̥ṣṇapaṇḍita, the author of the commentary Prakāśa on Rāmacandra’s Prakriyākaumudī. Śrīkr̥ṣṇapaṇḍita (Prakāśa on Prakriyākaumudī, Vol.I., p. 112) says: सीम्नोऽन्तः नलोपेऽतः पररूपं केशवेश एव । … मनस ईषा । असः पररूपं पृषोदरादित्वात्सलोपेऽकारस्य वा । … पतञ्जलिरिति … पतन्नञ्जलेः । मयूरव्यंसकादित्वात्समासः । पतन्नञ्जलिरस्य वा । अच्छब्दस्य पररूपम् । अन्ये तु पततीति पत इत्यजन्तेन पतशब्देन विग्रह्याकारस्य पररूपमाहुः । The modern Sanskrit commentary Raśmi on Prakāśa by the editor Muralīdharamiśra explains (p. 112): पतञ्जलिरित्यत्र पृषोदरादित्वादन्त्यलोपे पश्चात्पररूपम् । टेः पररूप- मितिपक्षेऽच्छब्दस्य । It seems that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is citing the view of Śrīkr̥ṣṇa- paṇḍita. The Bhaṭṭoji tradition prefers the derivation of the word patañjali from patita+añjali (= añjaleḥ patitaḥ), rather than from patan+anjali. The com- mentary Sadāśivabhaṭṭīya on Nāgeśa’s Laghuśabdenduśekhara (p.302-3) points out that Nāgeśa prefers the former derivation, and casts aside the latter which was offered by a grammarian referred to as Ratnākara: एतेन पतन्नञ्जले- रिति विगृह्णन् रत्नाकरः कटाक्षितो, लडर्थस्य बाधात् । For earlier explanations of the words manīṣā and manīṣita along the lines of Prakāśa, see Mallinātha’s com- mentary on Kumārasambhava (1.28 and 5.4). I am grateful to Cardona for providing the reference to Mallinātha.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 658 सिध्यति । ‘द्वौ रेफौ तयोरेका मात्रे’ति पाणिनीयाः112 । तदा पितृ- भक्तः । ऋलोः सावर्ण्ये113 पित्ऌभक्तः । दीर्घत्वाक्षेपात् पितॄभक्तः पित्लॄ- भक्त इति रूपचतुष्टयम्114 । अस्य ऋकारस्य केनचिदक्षरेण संयोगे जाते सत्यपि तत्पूर्वाक्षरस्य गुरुत्वं दीर्घत्वं च नेति पैङ्गले115 दृश्यते । सन्धौ स्वरधर्मो दृश्यते । णत्वविधाने रेफत्वं दृश्यते । विसर्जनीयलोपे समान- संज्ञस्य दीर्घाभावाद्रेफत्वाभावोऽपि । नाम्युपधस्य रेफस्य मूर्ध्नि धारणाद् व्यञ्जनत्वमपि दृश्यते116 । अतो न ज्ञायते कोऽयमद्भुतो वर्णः [।] अस्य जातिद्वयं यथाकथञ्चिदनुमीयते । षत्वणत्वविधाने रेफत्वं सन्धौ स्वरत्वं च । मूर्ध्नि रेफधारणादमुकत्वमिति ये वैयाकरणास्ते साहङ्कारमाज्ञा- पयन्तु । वयं ऌत्वं भावयामः । अत एव ऋऌ(K: ऌऋ)वर्णयोः सावर्ण्यं पाणिनीयाश्च रेफोत्तर ऋकार एकः पक्षः । अकारोत्तर ऋकारोऽपरः तदार् अृ इति द्वौ सिद्धौ । अत्रोत्तरपक्षमाश्रित्य सन्धियोगादपि गोरगित्यत्र117

112Compare: ऋति ऋ वा ऌति ऌ वेत्युभयत्रापि विधेयं वर्णद्वयं द्विमात्रम् । आद्यस्य मध्ये द्वौ रेफौ तयोरेका मात्रा । अभितोऽज्भक्तेरपरा । द्वितीयस्य तु मध्ये द्वौ लकारौ । शेषं प्राग्वत् । SK on P.6.1.101 (p. 22). 113The doctrine of the homogeneity of r̥ and l̥ was first proposed by Kātyāyana in his Vārttika : ऋऌकारयोः सवर्णविधिः, MB (MLBD edn., Vol.I, Sec.I., p. 158). For a detailed analysis of this doctrine, see: Deshpande (1975: 25ff). 114It is not clear why the example pitr̥bhakta and its variations are offered here. The example does not involve a combination of a final r̥ with an initial r̥, resulting into a long vowel. 115I have not found any clear indication like this in the rules of Piṅgala’s Chandaḥsūtra, except that sūtra (1.9: gr̥l) uses the syllable gr̥ as an instance of a light (l = laghu), indicating at the least that r̥ is looked upon as a vowel and as a light vowel. 116This refers to the graphic behavior of r. It also indicates a phase of the grammatical tradition when the practitioners could not keep apart the oral language from the written language. The present description applies to a word like निर्ऋति. There may be some truth to this argument, in the sense that those who practiced this form of writing may have been influenced by the consonant-initial pronunciation of r̥ as ri or ru. 117The words gor ak refer to PS 119 above. It is not clear why this rule is brought into this discussion of r̥ here.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका659 अकारद्वयं सिद्धम् । पूर्वेणापि सिद्ध्येत् । पितृ ऋणं पितॄणं मातृ ऋतुः मातॄतुः । अयं प्रयोगः वैदिके न दृश्यते सौत्र एवेति118 । १३०. अवर्ण- स्येवर्ण एकारः (च.आ. ३.२.२१)। अकारस्थाने इवर्णे परे द्वयोरपि स्थाने एकारादेशः स्यात् । उदाहरणमत्रैव स्य इ इति स्थिते द्वयोरेकारः स्ये इति सिद्धम् । येन इदं येनेदम् । च इति चेति । दीर्घे रमेश इति । गवेन्द्र इत्यगागमात्सिद्धम्119 । १३१. दीर्घप्लुतव्यवधाने च (not found in CA)। अवर्णस्य स्थाने दीर्घेण प्लुतेन च व्यवधाने इकारे ई ई३ परे एकारादेशः स्यान्नत्वैकारः । गङ्गा आ इदं गङ्गेदम् । शिव आ इति शिवेति । अवर्णस्यानुवृत्तिः । १३२. उवर्ण ओकारः (च.आ. ३.२. २२)। अकारस्य स्थाने उवर्णे परे द्वयोरेक ओकारादेशः स्यात् । कृष्ण उपास्यः कृष्णोपास्यः, गङ्गोदकम्, राम ऊनः रामोनः, जाया ऊतिः जायो- तिः, इला आ ऊध्वम् इलोर्ध्वम् । १३३. अरमृवर्णे (च.आ. ३.२. २३)। अकारस्य स्थाने ऋवर्णे परे द्वयोरपि स्थाने एकः अर् भवति । अरमिति नपुंसकत्वमार्षम् । कृष्ण ऋद्धिः कृष्णर्द्धिः । जल ऋतुः जल- र्तुः । ब्रह्मर्षयः । तव ऌकारः तवल्कारः । सावर्ण्यात्समानः प्रयोगः120 । १३४. उपसर्गाद्धात्वादावारम् (च.आ. ३.२.२५, पाठान्तरम्)। उप-

118This statement draws an interesting contrast between vaidika and sautra. It says that examples like pitr̥̄ṇam and mātr̥̄tuḥ are not attested in Vedic texts, but are found only in illustrating rules of grammar. I think the word sautra is used here not in the sense of ‘occurring in the sūtra,’ but in the broad sense of ‘illustrating the rules of grammar.’ One may, however, note that this simultaneously admits that such expressions are not found in the classical language either. One needs to consider the possibility whether the conso- nant-initial pronunciation of r̥ as ri or ru makes it resistant to this type of sandhi in actual usage. 119This also refers to PS 119 above which, among other things, prescribes the augment aK to the word go before the word indra, i.e. go+a+indra > gav+a+indra > gava+indra > gavendra. 120This statement is deemed necessary because the original CA rules do not provide for the change of a+l̥ to al. For similar issues in the Pāṇinian system, see Deshpande (1975: 24-25).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 660 सर्गात् उपसर्गस्य अकारात् धातोरादिभूते ऋकारे परे अर् इत्यस्य स्थाने आरं विजानीयादिति पूर्वत्राप्यन्वयः । प्रार्छत् । उपार्छति । अवार्छेत् । उप ऌकारः उपाल्कारः । अयं रेफः पूर्वस्वरस्यान्ते तत्र पदान्ते विसर्जनीय- त्वमाशङ्क्य सूत्रविधानसामर्थ्यान्नेत्युत्तरम्121 । प्रकृतिभावोऽपि नेति । १३५. ऋणवत्सतरकम्बलवसनदशानामृणे122 (not found in CA)। ऋणार्णं प्रार्णं दशार्णो देशः । नदी च [।] ऋणशब्दो दुर्गभूमौ जले च123 । १३६. वा सुपि124 (not found in CA)। प्रर्षभीयति प्रार्षभीयति । प्रल्कारीयति । प्राल्कारीयति । उप ऋते उपर्ते उपार्ते । १३७. तृतीयासमासे च125 (not found in CA)। शीतेन ऋतः शीतार्तः इति ।

121The argument assumes that the replacement ār for -a+r̥- can be treated as occurring at the end of the previous word or at the beginning of the following word, cf. PS 124-125 above. 122The source of this statement can be ultimately traced to the Vārttikas (प्रवत्स- तरकम्बलवसनानां चर्णे) and (ऋणदशाभ्यां च) on P. 6.1.89. While the KV keeps these two as separate statements, they are combined by the Prakriyākaumudī on P.6.1.89 into प्रवत्सतरवत्सरकम्बलवसनदशानामृणे and SK on P.6.1.89 into प्रवत्सतरकम्बलवसनदशानामृणे. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s rule seems to be a modification of the SK statement. It does not include the word vatsara which is found in the formulation of the Prakriyākaumudī. Apparently, it was included in the Prakriyākaumudī on the basis of its inclusion by Durga in his commentary on the Kātantravyākaraṇa, cf. Prakāśa on Prakriyākaumudī (Vol.I., p. 109). The word pra is not included in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s formulation as given by the manuscript K. However, the citation of the example prārṇam suggests that it was included in his original formulation. 123Compare: SK on P.6.1.89 (p. 20): दशार्णो देशः । नदी च दशार्णा । ऋणशब्दो दुर्गभूमौ जले च । 124Compare P.6.1.92 (वा सुप्यापिशलेः). It seems like the reference to Āpiśali was omitted by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa, as it was grammatically deemed to be unnecesary, cf. SK on P.6.1.92: आपिशलिग्रहणं पूजार्थम् । At the beginning of his Saṃjñā- prakaraṇa, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa says: आचार्यनाम्नो विभाषा ज्ञेया. Since P.6.1.92 already contains the word vā, the reference to Āpiśali providing another indication of option was clearly deemed to be unnecessary. For an extensive treatment of this general question, see: Deshpande (1978). 125Compare Kātyāyana’s Vārttika (ऋते च तृतीयासमासे) on P.6.1.89.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका661 परत्वाद्दीर्घेन । उपऋकारीयति उपर्कारीयति । १३८. एकारैकारयोरै- कारः (च.आ. ३.२.२७)। अवर्णस्थाने एऐकारयोः परतो सतोः पूर्व- परयोः पदान्तपदाद्योः स्वरयोः स्थाने एक ऐकारादेशः स्यात् । अम्ब एषा अम्बैषा ते पूजा अम्बैश्वर्यं तव । गङ्गैश्वर्यं गङ्गैषा राधैति कृष्णैधते । प्रैषः प्रैष्यः । १३९. न दीर्घोपधे (not found in CA)। ईषगतिः प्रेष्यः126 । १४०. शकल्येष्या(K: ष्वा)दिषु पररूपम् (च.आ. ३.२.२९)। ‘एङि पररूपम्’ (पा. ६.१.९४) इति प्रेजते उपोषति । विकल्पात् उपैड- कीयति उपेडकीयति127 । १४१. अनिश्चये एवे च128 (not found in CA)। क्वेवं भोक्ष्यसे । क्व एवम् । अद्य एवम् अद्येवम् । निश्चये तु अद्यैवम् इहैवैधि । नियोगे तु तवैव न किलैवं ननु किलैवमिति । १४२. स्वादीरेरिणोर्वृद्धिः129 (not found in CA)। पदादेर्दीर्घस्यापि । स्वेनेरितुं शीलमस्येति स्वैरी स्वैरिणी च । स्व ईरम् ईकारस्य एत्वे संयोगे पररूपत्वे स्वैरी130 । १४३. ओकारौकारयोरौकारः (च.आ. ३.२.२८)। अवर्ण- स्थाने ओकारे औकारे च परे द्वयोः स्थाने एक औकारादेशः पदान्त- पदाद्योः । गङ्गा ओघः गङ्गौघः, कृष्ण औत्कण्ठ्यम् कृष्णौत्कण्ठ्यम्131 ।

126Probably originates in SK on P.6.1.89 (p. 20): इष इच्छायां तुदादिः । इष गतौ दिवादिः । इष आभीक्ष्ण्ये क्र्यादिः । एषां घञि ण्यति च एषः एष्यः इति रूपे । तत्र पररूपे प्राप्तेऽनेन वृद्धिः । प्रैषः प्रैष्यः । यस्तु ईष उञ्छे । यश्च ईष गतिहिंसादर्शनेषु । तयोर्दीर्घोपध- त्वात् । ईषः ईष्यः । तत्राद्गुणे । प्रेषः । प्रैष्यः । 127Probably originates in SK on P.6.1.94 (p. 20): एङि पररूपम् । ६.१.९४ । आदुपसर्गादेङादौ धातौ परे पररूपमेकादेशः स्यात् । प्रेजते । उपोषति । इह वा सुपीत्य- नुवर्त्य वाक्यभेदेन व्याख्येयम् । तेन एङादौ सुब्धातौ वा । उपेडकीयति । उपैडकीयति । 128Compare the Vārttika (एवे चानियोगे) on P.6.1.94. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary seems to derive its examples from the KV and SK on this Vārttika. 129Compare the Vārttika (स्वादीरेरिणोः) on P.6.1.89. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary follows the SK on P.6.1.89 (p. 19): स्वेनेरितुं शीलमस्येति स्वैरी स्वैरिणी च । 130Kr̥ṣṇadāsa says that in the combination sva+īra, the ī of īra first changes to e and then through the pararūpa sandhi in sva+era, one gets svaira. None of this makes any sense. The rule actually says that in the combination sva+īra the single substitute for a+ī is a vr̥ddhi, i.e. ai, rather than the usual e. 131These examples are found in the Prakriyākaumudī and SK on P.6.1.88.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 662 तव ओदनं तवौदनम् । १४५. अक्षादूहिन्यां वृद्धिः132 (not found in CA)। अक्षौहिणी सेना । १४६. प्रादूहोढयोर्वृद्धिः133 (not found in CA)। प्र ऊहः वृद्धिः औ संयोगे प्रौहः प्रौढः प्रौढिः । ऊठि प्रष्ठौहः134 । गुणे पररूपे उपोषति । विकल्पेन प्रोघीयति प्रौघीयति135 । १४७. ओत्वोष्ठयोः समासे वा136 (not found in CA)। अवर्णस्य ओत्वोष्ठयोः परयोः द्वयोः स्थाने वृद्धिरेकादेशः स्यात् । तव ओष्ठः तवौष्ठः ममौतुः इति । समासे विकल्पात् स्थूलोतुः पररूपम् । स्थूलौतुः वृद्धिः । रक्तोष्ठे पर[रूप]म् । बिम्बौष्ठे वृद्धिरेका[देशः] । १४८. ओमाङोश्च137 (not found in CA)। ओमि आङि च पररूपादे… । अद्योम्138, रामेहि139

132The source for this rule is the Vārttika (अक्षादूहिन्याम्) on P.6.1.89, which Patañjali expands as: अक्षादूहिन्यां वृद्धिर्वक्तव्या. While the Prakriyākaumudī offers the example simply as akṣauhiṇī, Bhaṭṭoji’s SK on P.6.1.89 (p. 19) reads: akṣauhiṇī senā. 133This goes back to the Vārttika (प्रादूहोढोढ्येषैष्येषु) on P.6.1.89. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa seems to have excised the forms īṣa and īṣya, because they are separately considered earlier. 134This is not covered by PS 146, but relates to the element ūṭh mentioned in P.6.1.89 (एत्येधत्यूठ्सु), and the example praṣṭhauhaḥ is the standard example in the KV and the SK. In praṣṭha+ūha, the element ūha is derived from the causative of the root vah, by the replacement of the initial va with ū (= ūṬH) by P.6.4.132 (वाह ऊठ्). 135The passage beginning with guṇe seems to be based on SK on P.6.1.94 (p. 20): एङि पररूपम् । आदुपसर्गादेङादौ धातौ परे पररूपमेकादेशः स्यात् । … उपोषति । इह वा सुपीत्यनुवर्त्य वाक्यभेदेन व्याख्येयम् । तेन एङादौ सुब्धातौ वा । … प्रोघीयति । प्रौघीयति । 136This is identical with the Vārttika (ओत्वोष्ठयोः समासे वा) on P.6.1.94. The examples sthūlautuḥ and bimbauṣṭhī are found in the MB on this Vārttika. The example of a non-compounded sequence tavauṣṭhaḥ is found in the com- mentary Prakāśa on Prakriyākaumudī (Vol.I., p. 111), as well as in the SK on P.1.1.64 (p. 21). All three are found in the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (64, p. 11). 137This is identical with P.6.1.95. 138The SK and the Prakriyākaumudī on P.6.1.95 offer the example śivāyoṃ namaḥ. The example adyom seems to have come from the Sārasvata- Vyākaraṇa (54, p. 10). 139In this case, the SK and the Prakriyāprakāśa on P.6.1.95, and the Sārasvata-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका663 इकारः । १४९. एकारौकारान्तात्पूर्वः पदादेरकारस्य (च.आ. ३.२. ३०)। एकारान्तादोकारान्ताच्च पदादेः अकारस्य पूर्वः नाम पूर्वरूप एका- देशः स्यात् । ‘ते॒ऽव॒र्ध॒न्त॒’(ऋग्वेद १.८५.७) । ‘म॒न्योऽवि॑धत्’ (अ.वे. ४. ३२.१) । हरेऽव । विष्णोऽवेति140 । १५०. प्रकृत्या वा141 (not found in CA)। गोऽग्रम् । गोअजिनम् । तेअत्र142 । इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्स- व्याकरणे स्वरसन्धिः । [प्रकृतिभावप्रकरणम्] अथ प्रकृतिभावः । पदान्ते इत्यधिकारः । १५१. प्रगृह्याश्च प्रकृत्या (च.आ. ३.२.१०)। स्वरे इत्यनुवृत्तिः । प्रगृह्याः प्रगृह्यसंज्ञिका ये वर्णास्ते याथातथ्येनैवावतिष्ठन्ति । सन्धिं न यान्ति । चकारात् प्लुता अपि प्रथमं प्रगृह्यसन्धिं ततः प्लुतसन्धिमिति वक्ष्यामः क्रमेण । १५२. उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य (च.आ. १.३.१०)। अपृक्तस्य परेणासंपृक्तस्य एकस्यैव उकारस्य स्थाने इतिपदे परे प्रागनुवृत्तेरनुनास्यम् । १५३. दीर्घः प्रगृह्यश्च (च.आ. १.३.११)। दैर्घ्यं प्रगृह्यत्वञ्चेति ज्ञेयम् । ऊँ इति पदम् । ऊँ । क्वचित्प्रकृत्या । तम्वभि । इद्वधि । इद्विन्द्रः इति ।

Vyākaraṇa (54, p. 10) offer the example śiva+ā+ihi > śivehi. Perhaps, as a devout Vaiṣṇava, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa changed it to rāmehi. 140The examples hare ’va and viṣṇo ’va are found in the Prakriyākaumudī and the SK on P.6.1.109 (एङः पदान्तादति). 141Compare P.6.1.122 (सर्वत्र विभाषा गोः). The example go ’gram is found in the SK on P.6.1.122 (p. 22): लोके वेदे चैङन्तस्य गोरति वा प्रकृतिभावः स्यात् पदान्ते । गोअग्रम् । गोऽग्रम् । 142It is not clear whether Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s rule प्रकृत्या वा was meant to cover the additional example te atra. The example te+atra changing to te ’tra is offered by the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (51, p. 9). The example te atra as an example of prakr̥tibhāva could possibly come under प्रकृत्या वा to make up the syllables of a metrical line in Vedic, cf. P.6.1.115 (प्रकृत्यान्तःपादमव्यपरे). The other possi- blity is that the example te atra is misplaced here and actually is supposed to go with PS 151 below as an example of an uncombinable dual form (pra- gr̥hya).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 664 १५४. ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे (च.आ. १.३.१२)। ईकारश्च ऊकारश्च प्रगृह्यौ सप्तम्यर्थे स्यातां चेत् । सप्तम्यर्थे किम् । १५५. अधि- योगे सप्तम्यर्थे द्वितीया143 (not found in CA)। सोमो गौरीम् अधि श्रितः । विभक्तिलोपे ‘गाै॒री अधि॑ श्रि॒तः’ (ऋग्वेद ९.१२.३) इति । प्रतियोगे144 ‘मामकी तनू’ (पैप्पलादसंहिता ६.६.८) आविशेति । माम- क्यां तन्वामित्यर्थः । वाप्यामश्व इत्यर्थान्तरे मा भूदिति145 । १५६. द्वि- वचनान्तौ (च.आ. १.३.१३)। औ इति विभक्तिनिर्दिष्टावीऊकारौ च । उ[दाहरणम्] हरी एतौ । विष्णू इमौ । १५७. एकारान्तश्च (च.आ. १.३.१४, पाठान्तरम्)। तथैव द्विवचनविभक्तिनिर्दिष्ट एकारः सन्धिं नैति । पचेते इमौ । उदा° ‘ते आ॒चर॑न्ती॒’ इति मन्त्रे (ऋग्वेद ६. ७५.४)। ‘घृ॒तव॑ती॒ भुव॑नानाम्’ (ऋग्वेद ६.७०.१) इति च (?)। माले एते । १५८. अस्मे युष्मे त्वे मे इति चोदात्तः (च.आ. १.३.१५)। १५९. अमी बहुवचनम् (च.आ. १.३.१६)। अमी ईशाः । अमी अश्वाः । अमू आसाते । १६०. निपातोऽपृक्तोऽनाकारः (च.आ. १.३.१७)। अ अपेहि । विस्मये इ इन्द्रं पश्य । उ उमेश उ उत्तिष्ठ । आ एवम् आः । आ उष्णम् ओष्णम् । आङ् ङिदन्तो न प्रगृह्यः । १६१. ओकारान्तश्च (च.आ. १.३.१८)। नो अह । अहो आश्चर्यम् । अथो एवम् । १६२. आमन्त्रितं चैतावनार्षे (च.आ. १.३.१९)। आर्षो

143This formulation offers perhaps the best explanation why CA (1.3.12) uses the expression saptamyarthe, rather than considering forms like gaurī below as irregular locatives. There was apparently a tradition of viewing these as being non-locative forms with locative meaning. For additional discussion, see notes on CA (1.3.12). Bhaṭṭoji has a different view of these examples, cf. SK on P.1.1.19 (p. 26): ‘सुपां सुलुक्’ इति सप्तम्या लुक्. 144The expression pratiyoge is parallel to adhiyoge in PS 155. However, the example cited, i.e. मामकी तनू, is not an example of prati, but of adhi. The full citations from Paippalāda (6.6.8) reads: अध्यस्यां मामकी तनू. The word āviśeti in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary makes one wonder if he thought of the citation as मामकी तनू आविश. However, I have not been able to trace such a passage. 145Both the examples and the counter-example are found in the KV and the SK on P.1.1.19.

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका665 वैदिकः तं विना इतौ इतिपदे परे आमन्त्रितं सम्बोधनम् । चकारा- द्विकल्पः । आर्षः प्रगृह्यः अन्यो न । विष्णो इति । विष्ण इति । विष्ण- विति । ‘वाय॒वा या॑हि’ (ऋग्वेद १.२.१) । ‘अध्व॑र्य॒वा तु’ (ऋग्वेद ८.३२.२४) । ‘इन्द॒विन्द्रः॑’ (ऋग्वेद ९.६.२) । ‘ब्रह्मबन्धविति’ (काण्व शु.य.सं. १०.६)146 अनार्षः । १६३. आर्त्नी इवादिष्विवादितिपरः (च.आ. १.३.२०)। आर्त्नी इवादिषु द्विवचनान्तेषु इवात् इवपदात् इतिशब्दः परः बलीयान् । ‘आर्त्नी॑ इव॒ ज्यया॑’ (अ.वे. १.१.३) । ‘आर्त्नी इमे’ (अ.वे.पै.सं. १५.१०.४) । प्र(म?)णीव147 । ‘रोदसीमे’148 । ‘दम्प॑तीव’ (ऋग्वेद २.३९.२) । ‘उ॒प॒धीव॑ प्र॒धीव॑’ (ऋग्वेद २.३९.४) । एते प्रयोगाः क्वचित्प्रकृत्या क्वचित्सन्धिः । १६४. अनुनासिकोऽन्तःपदे ह्रस्वः (च.आ. १.३.२१)। पदाभ्यन्तरे योऽनुनासिकः स्वरः स ह्रस्वो भवति । १६५. सन्धौ पदान्ते च (not found in CA)। दधि । मधु- लिट् । अन्तर्वर्तिनीं विभक्तिमाश्रितः । दधिशेषः । चक्रि अत्र चक्र्यत्र । १६६. न समासे (not found in CA)। वाप्यश्वः । १६७. ऋवर्णे वा (not found in CA)। ब्रह्मर्षिः । सप्त ऋषयः । इति प्रगृह्यप्रकृतिः । [प्लुतप्रकरणम्] अथ प्लुतानि । १६८. वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत149 (not found in CA) इत्यधिकृत्य १६९. दूरादाह्वाने150 गाने रोदने शङ्काप्रश्ने आशीर्वचने

146Also cited in the KV on P.1.1.16. Also see the SK on P.1.1.16 (p. 26). 147For maṇīva, see the KV on P.1.1.16. Also SK on P.1.1.11 (p. 24). 148One would assume that this is a combination of rodasī+ime. However, I have not located this sequence in the Saṃhitās. AV (18.1.31) has rodasī me, which may have been misunderstood as a combination of rodasī+ime. It may also be a corruption for rodasīva, which is cited as a deviant example in the KV on P.1.1.11 along with maṇīva and dampatīva. 149Compare P.8.2.82 (वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुत उदात्तः). 150Compare P.8.2.84 (दूराद्धूते च).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 666 प्रेरणे यज्ञाङ्गे च (not found in CA)। १७०. ओमभ्यादाने151 (not found in CA)। १७१. ये३ यजामहे152 (not found in CA)। १७२. याज्यान्तःप्रणवश्च153 (not found in CA)। १७३. ब्रू३हिप्रे३ष्यश्रौ३षड्- वौ३षडा३वहानामादेः154 (not found in CA)। १७४. अग्नी३त्प्रेषणे155 (not found in CA)। १७५. विभाषा पृष्टप्रतिवचने हेः156 (not found in CA)। १७६. निगृह्यानुयोगे च157 (not found in CA)। १७७. आम्रेडितं भर्त्सने158 (not found in CA)। १७८. अङ्गयुक्तं तिङा- काङ्क्षम्159 (not found in CA)। १७९. विचार्यमाणानाम्160 (not found in CA)। १८०. पूर्वं तु भाषायाम्161 (not found in CA)। १८१. प्रतिश्रवणे चोदात्तम्162(not found in CA)। १८२. अनुदात्तं प्रश्नान्ता- भिपूजितयोः163 (not found in CA)। १८३. चिदुपमार्थे164 (not found in CA)। १८४. उपरिस्विदासी३दिति च165 (not found in CA)। १८५. है३हे३रामेति गुरोः स्वरादनृकाराच्चेति166 (not found in CA)। १८६. अशूद्राधिकारे आशिषि167 (not found in CA)। १८७. पूर्वस्वरं

151Compare P.8.2.7 (ओमभ्यादाने). 152Compare P.8.2.88 (ये यज्ञकर्मणि). SK on this rule offers ये३ यजामहे as an illustration on this rule. 153Compare P.8.2.89 (प्रणवष्टेः) and P.8.2.90 (याज्यान्तः). 154Compare P.8.2.91 (ब्रूहिप्रेष्यश्रौषड्वौषडावहानामादेः). 155Compare P.8.2.92 (अग्नीत्प्रेषणे परस्य च). 156Compare P.8.2.93 (विभाषा पृष्टप्रतिवचने हेः). 157Compare P.8.2.94 (निगृह्यानुयोगे च). 158Compare P.8.2.95 (आम्रेडितं भर्त्सने). 159Compare P.8.2.96 (अङ्गयुक्तं तिङाकाङ्क्षम्). 160Compare P.8.2.97 (विचार्यमाणानाम्). 161Compare P.8.2.98 (पूर्वं तु भाषायाम्). 162Compare P.8.2.99 (प्रतिश्रवणे च) 163Compare P.8.2.100 (अनुदात्तं प्रश्नान्ताभिपूजितयोः). 164Compare P.8.2.101 (चिदिति चोपमार्थे प्रयुज्यमाने). 165Compare P.8.2.102 (उपरिस्विदासीदिति च). 166Seems to combine P.8.2.85 (हैहेप्रयोगे हैहयोः) and 8.2.86 (गुरोरनृतोऽनन्त्यस्या- प्येकैकस्य प्राचाम्). 167Compare P.8.2.83 (प्रत्यभिवादे चाशूद्रे).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका667 संयोगाभिघातश्च (च.आ. १.४.१३)। पूर्वमक्षरं स्वरेण युक्तं तस्य स्वरस्य संयोगः सन्धिः तस्याभिघातो नाम पृथक्करणम् । १८८. तदेव स्फोटनः (च.आ. १.४.१२)। स्फोटनसंज्ञः । खण्वखा३इ खैमखा३इ । अत्र सामगायने स्वराभिघातः । १८९. खैमखे (च.आ. १.४.१४) मूलम् । १९०. मध्ये तदुरीदं भूया३ इदा३ मित्यूर्ध्वोऽनु सृष्टा३ स्तिर्यङ् नु सृष्टाः३ सर्वा दिशः पुरुष आ बभूवाँ३ पराञ्चमोदनं प्राशीः३ प्रत्यञ्चा३ मिति त्वमोदनं प्राशी३ स्त्वामोदना३ इति वशेया३ मवशेति यत्तदासी३ दिदं नु ता३ दिति प्लुतानि (च.आ. १.४.१४)। १९१. प्रश्ने (not found in CA)। ऋकारवर्जितात् स्वरा- द्दीर्घात्प्रत्येकं प्लुतो वा दे३वदत्त168 । देवद३त्त । देवदत्ता३ । १९२. आशिषि (not found in CA)। आयुष्मानेधि अमुकशर्म[ा]३न् वर्म[ा]३न् गुप्ता३ । १९३. अभिपूजिते (not found in CA)। न त्वा भीरिव विन्दती३ । १९४. क्वचिदप्लुतवत्169 (not found in CA)। अनार्षे इतिपदे परे प्लुतोऽप्लुतवद्भवति । सन्धिं करोति । सुवचन[ा]३ इति । सुव- चनेति । चिनुही३ इति च चिनुहीति । चिनुही३ इदम् । चिनुहीदम् । प्रगृह्याश्रये प्रकृतिभावे प्लुतस्य श्रवणं न स्यात् अग्नी[३] इति170 । १९५. किमर्थः परिपाठ एतावत् स्वार्थोऽपि बहुविधास्त्रिविधाः प्लुतयो भवन्ति । स्वरपरा अभिनिष्ठानपरा व्यञ्जनपरास्तासां याः समाना- क्षरपरास्ता एतावत्प्लुतवद्भवन्तीति (च.आ. १.४.१४, अंशः)। इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्सव्याकरणे प्लुतसन्धिः ।

168This is the misplaced commentary on PS 185 above. How do we get the vā in the commentary here? Compare SK on P.8.2.86 (p. 24): इह प्राचामिति योगो विभज्यते । तेन सर्वः प्लुतो विकल्प्यते । 169Compare P.6.1.129 (अप्लुतवदुपस्थिते). 170Compare the SK on P.6.1.129 (p. 24): तथा च प्रगृह्याश्रये प्रकृतिभावे प्लुतस्य श्रवणं न स्यात् अग्नी३ इति ।

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 668 [व्यञ्जनसन्धिप्रकरणम्] अथ व्यञ्जनसन्धिः । १९६. संहितायाम् (च.आ. २.१.१) इत्यधिकारः । १९७. पदान्तानामुत्तमानाम्171 (च.आ. २.१.२, अंशः, पाठान्तरम्) । १९८. तृतीया घोषवत्स्वरेषु (च.आ. २.१.२, अंशः, पाठान्तरम्)। उत्तमानां वर्गप्रथमाक्षराणां पदान्तानां स्थाने घोष- वत्स्वक्षरेषु च स्वरेषु च परेषु तृतीयाः स्ववर्गतृतीया भवन्ति । १९९. स्पर्शाः प्रथमोत्तमाः (च.आ. १.१.८)। स्पर्शेषु ये प्रथमाः वर्णास्ते उत्तमा इत्यत्र संज्ञा172 । २००. प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति (च.आ. १.१.१०, अंशः)। यानि प्रथमान्तानि वर्गप्रथमाक्षरान्तानि पदानि संयोगे तृतीयान्तानि भवन्ति । यानि च तृतीयवर्णान्तानि पदान्ते प्रथमान्तानि भवन्ति प्रथमतृतीययोः परस्परं साधर्म्यम्173 । २०१. शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञानं न वृत्तिः (च.आ. १.१.१०, अंशः)। अत्र संज्ञायां शौनकस्य प्रतिज्ञैव प्रमाणमासीत् न वृत्तिः । अक्षरार्थ इति । इतरथा तु पञ्चमवर्णस्यैवो- त्तमत्वं दृश्यते । २०२. उत्तमा उत्तमेषु (च.आ. २.१.५) इति सूत्रात् । वाग्यज्ञः वाक् अर्थः वागर्थः वागीशः । दृग्रूपम् । लुग्जातिः । धिग्डाकिनी । दिग्वासः । भुग्लक्ष्यम् । मुग्दलम् । युग्बाहुः । अज्भ्यः ।

171This is a misreading for पदान्तानामनुत्तमानाम्. The misreading must go back to the text as it was received by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa. It has led him to come up with an uncommon interpretation of the term uttama under PS 198 and 199 below. 172The rule actually means to say that among the members of the five stop series, the firsts (prathama) and the lasts (uttama) in each series can occur at the end of words (padya). Kr̥ṣṇadāsa thinks that the rule says that the first members (prathama) of the series are also called uttama. This is clearly inaccurate. However, he is forced to launch into this unlikely meaning for the word uttama, because of the wrong reading he inherited for his rule PS 197 (= CA 2.1.2). The correct CA reading for this rule is पदान्तानामनुत्तमानाम्, while Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s received reading is पदान्तानामुत्तमानाम्. On rule PS 201 below, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa acknowledges that such an interpretation of the term uttama is quite uncommon: इतरथा तु पञ्चमवर्णस्यैवोत्तमत्वं दृश्यते । 173For a more accurate interpretation of this rule, see the notes on CA (1.1.10).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका669 षडङ्गम् । तदन्नम् । अब्यन्त्रम् । जलयन्त्रमिति174 । २०३. पदान्ते चाघोषाः (च.आ. २.१.३)। च पुनस्ते एव प्रथमतृतीया वर्णाः पदान्ते अघोषाः प्रथमवर्णा भवन्ति । ऊर्ग ऊर्क, अज् अच्, लिड् लिट्, शरद् शरत्, त्रिष्टुब् त्रिष्टुप् । २०४. अघोषेषु च (च.आ. २.१.४)। च पुनः अघोषेषु वर्णेषु परेषु सत्सु अघोषा एव स्युः । प्रथमा एव स्युः । दिक्कल्पः । दिक्चक्रम् । न्यक्टङ्कारः । वाक्ततिः (K: न्तिः)। असृ- क्पटः । अच्कृतिः । अच्तन्तुः । अच्परितः । ऌट्कार्यम् । लट्चिह्नम् । लिट्पदम् । स्तुप्कथम् । स्तुप्चिन्ता । स्तुप्टङ्कितम् । एवं द्वितीयवर्णेषु । तत्कर्म175 । तत्खननम् । तत्परः176 । २०५. उत्तमा उत्तमेषु (च.आ. २.१.५)। उत्तमेषु पञ्चमवर्णेषु परेषु सत्सु प्रथमास्तृतीयाश्च उत्तमाः पञ्चमा वा177 भवन्ति । दिक् नालम् दिग्नालम् । दिङ्नभः । युक् मित्रम् । युग्मित्रम् । युङ्मित्रम् । पृतनाषाट् नरः । पृतनाषाड्नरः । पृतनाषाण्नरः । षण्णरः । षण्मासाः । चित् मयम् । चिद्मयम् । चिन्म- यम् । स्तुप् निधिः । स्तुब्निधिः । स्तुम्निधिः । त्रिष्टुम्मतम् । यवादिगणे दकारनिपातनात् ककुद्मान्(K: द्मी)178 । २०६. द्वितीयाः शषसेषु

174The examples offered here show voicing of voiceless stops before voiced consonants and vowels, e.g. vāk+yajñaḥ > vāgyajñaḥ. These can be treated as examples of CA (2.1.2 = PS 197-8) above. The expression jalayantram is not an example, but looks like an explanation of the meaning of the example abyantram. 175This example does not fit the description एवं द्वितीयवर्णेषु. 176This example also does not fit the description एवं द्वितीयवर्णेषु. 177The original CA rule (2.1.5) is not an optional rule. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa offers the optional interpretation most probably under the influence of the optional rule in Pāṇini, cf. P.8.4.45 (यरोऽनुनासिकेऽनुनासिको वा). See the notes on CA (2.1. 5). 178The yavādigaṇa is referred to in P.8.2.9 (मादुपधायाश्च मतोर्वोऽयवादिभ्यः). Kr̥ṣṇadāsa makes an interesting observation that the word kakud is listed in this gaṇa with a final d, and hence this d is preserved in the formation kakudmān and not changed to kakunmān. One may note that the word kakud is listed in the yavādigaṇa as listed in the SK (p.728). The argument of Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is based directly on Bhaṭṭoji’s SK on P.8.4.45 (pp. 28-29): कथं

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 670 (च.आ. २.१.६)। शषसेषु परेषु वर्गप्रथमास्ते द्वितीयाः स्युः । अर्वाक् शफः । अत्र कस्य खत्वम् । अर्वाख्शफः । कषयोगे क्षः कस्य खत्वात् (?)। प्रत्यक् सिद्धिः अत्रापि खत्वम् । २०७. तेभ्यः पूर्वचतुर्थो हकारस्य (च.आ. २.१.७)। तेभ्यो वर्गाक्षरेभ्यः179 उत्तरस्य हकारस्य स्थाने यद्वर्गाक्षरेण संयोगे तद्वर्गस्यादिमाक्षराच्चतुर्थवर्णस्यादेशः स्यात् । गोधुक् हरिः । गोधुग्घरिः । गोधुघ्घरिः180 । अझ्झीनम् । षढ्ढस्तः । मरुद्धानिः । ककुप् हारः । ककुभ्भारः । न्यङ् हासः । न्यङ्घासः । २०८. टकारा- त्सकारे तकारेण (च.आ. २.१.८)। टकारात् परे सकारे स एव सकारः तकारेण सहितो भवति । तकारेण सहयोगे तृतीयेत्यर्थबला- त्तकारोत्तरः सकारो ज्ञेयः । ‘डः सि धुट्’ (पा. ८.३.२९) इति पाणिनिः । षट् सन्तः । षट्त्सन्तः । पृतनाषाट्(K: ड्)त्सुवीरः । सावि- ट्त्सुवीरेति । २०९. ङणनेभ्यः कटतैः शषसेषु (च.आ. २.१.९)। प्रत्येकं वा । ङणनेभ्य उत्तरेषु शषसेषु क्रमेण कटतैः सह प्रत्येकं पृथक् पृथक् वा भवन्ति । ङकारयोगे ककारागम ऊष्मसु । णकारयोगे टकारा- गमः(K: टकारः) । नकारयोगे तकारागमः । २१०. ङणनेभ्य ऊष्मसु

तर्हि ‘मदोदग्राः ककुद्मन्त’ इति । यवादिगणे दकारनिपातनात्. The exact significance of this comment in the SK is debated by the commentaries on the SK. Nāgeśabhaṭṭa argues that this statement of Bhaṭṭoji is based on the view that the yavādigaṇa lists not just the word kakud, but the whole expression kakudmān, cf. Laghuśabdenduśekhara (p. 356): यवादिगणे ककुद्मानिति प्रकृति- प्रत्ययसमुदायः पठ्यते इति मतेनेदम्. The Prauḍhamanoramā on P.8.4.45 seems to back away from the interpretation offered in the SK and offers another alternative. 179While the CAB on this rule restricts this rule to non-nasal stops, तेभ्यः पदान्तेभ्यः अनुत्तमेभ्यः, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa extends it to cover the nasals. Also see the example nyaṅ+hāsaḥ > nyaṅghāsaḥ below. P.8.4.62 (झयो होऽन्यतरस्याम्) excludes the nasals. 180Some of these examples as given by the manuscript K seem to be impos- sible: godhugh-ghariḥ, ajh-jhīnam, ṣaḍh-ḍhastaḥ, and kakubh-bhāraḥ. The retention of the voiced aspirate stop before a voiced aspirate stop goes against all rules, cf. CA (1.4.3: सोष्मणि पूर्वस्यानूष्मा). For further discussion, see the notes on CA (1.4.3).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका671 प्रथमानां द्वितीया वा181 (not found in CA)। एभ्य एवोष्मसु शषसहेषु परेषु प्रथमानां कटतानां स्थाने खठथा वा स्युः । ‘ङ्णोः कुक्टुक् शरि’ (पा.८.३.२८) इति पाणिनिः । ‘चयो द्वितीयाः शरि’182 इति पाणि- नीयाः । उ°। प्रत्यङ् शीर्णः प्रत्यङ्क्शीर्णः प्रत्यङ्ख्शीर्णः । प्राङ्ख्- शीर्णः । सुगण्षष्ठः । सुगण्ट्शीर्णः । सुगण्ठ्शीर्णः । भवान् शान्तः । भवान्थ्शान्तः । एतैर्वर्णैर्मिश्रैः २११. शकारस्य छकारः (च.आ. २.१. १७, अंशः)। ततः २१२. नकारस्य शकारे ञकारः (च.आ. २.१. १०)। स्पष्टार्थं तदा भवाञ्छान्त इति सिद्धम् । आङ्क्ख्षष्ठः183 । सुगण्ट्ठ्षष्ठम् । भवान्त्थ्षष्ठम् । प्रत्यङ्क्ख्सिद्धः । सुगण्ट्ठ्सिद्धः । विद्वान्त्थ्सिद्धः । अर्वाङ्क्ख्हस्तः184 । अर्वाङ्घस्तः । सुगण्ट्ठ्हस्तः । सुगण्ढ्ढस्तः ।

181The optionality of this statement is derived probably from the fact that this
view is historically ascribed to the grammarian Pauṣkarasādi in Kātyāyana’s
Vārttika cited below.
182Cf. चयो द्वितीयाः शरि पौष्करसादेः, Vārttika 3 on P.8.4.48 (नादिन्याक्रोशे पुत्रस्य).
This Vārttika is cited in the SK under P.8.3.28 (p. 30).
183Many of the forms as cited in the manuscript here are impossible forms, e.g.
ākaṅkkhṣaṣṭhaḥ. It is perhaps possible that this is a shortform method of
referring to a pair of forms such as ākaṅkṣaṣṭhaḥ / ākaṅkhṣaṣṭhaḥ.
184The examples involving the word hasta as the second member seem to
indicate a certain confusion. The rules given above do not speak of the inser-
tion of k, ṭ, t etc. before h. CA (2.1.9) explicitly says śaṣaseṣu, which is
identical in its scope to śari in P.8.3.28 (ङ्णोः कुक्टुक् शरि) and in the Vārttika: चयो द्वितीयाः शरि पौष्करसादेः on P.8.4.48. In contrast with this, PS 210 (ङणनेभ्य ऊष्मसु प्रथमानां द्वितीया वा) uses the term ūṣman which is inclusive of h. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa makes this clear by rendering the word ūṣmasu by śaṣasaheṣu. This extension to h is not supported by any traditions of grammar or pho- netics. Also note that the change of h to a voiced aspirate stop is prescribed only before non-nasals. In P.8.4.62 (झयो होऽन्यतरस्याम्), the shortform jhaY excludes the nasals. Also CA (2.1.7: तेभ्यः पूर्वचतुर्थो हकारस्य) is interpreted by the CAB in a way that excludes the nasals, i.e. तेभ्यः पदान्तेभ्यः अनुत्तमेभ्यः पूर्व- चतुर्थो हकारस्य. On the other hand, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa on PS 207 (= CA 2.1.7) clearly extends this rule to include the nasals: तेभ्यो वर्गाक्षरेभ्यः (including nasals). He offers the example nyaṅ+hāsaḥ > nyaṅghāsaḥ. This is also not supported by any other traditions. It looks like an analogical extension.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 672 बलवान्त्थ्द्धस्तः । २१३. चवर्गीये घोषवति (च.आ. २.१.११)। नकारस्य स्थाने चवर्गीये घोषवति परे ञकारः स्यात् । अञ्जनम् । तञ्झयम् । २१४. टवर्गीये णकारः (च.आ. २.१.१२)। टवर्गीये घोषवत्यक्षरे परे नकारस्य णकारः स्यात् । खण्डम् । षण्ढः । २१५. तकारस्य शकारलकारयोः परसस्थानः (च.आ. २.१.१३)। तकारस्य स्थाने शलयोः परयोः परसस्थानो वर्णो भवति । शे छः । ले लः । त[च्]छास्त्रम् । सल्लयः185 । २१६. चटवर्गीयाच्च (च.आ. २.१.१४, पाठान्तरम्)। च परं चटवर्गीये व्यञ्जने परे तकारस्य पर-सस्थानः । तच्चित्रम् । तच्छत्रम् । तज्जातम् । तज्(K: झ्)झराः । तट्ट-ङ्कनम् । तट्ठा(K: ठ्ठा)नम् । तड्डामरम् । तड्ढा(K: ढ्ढा)कनम् । २१७. ताभ्यां समानपदे चवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसस्थानः (च.आ. २.१.१५)। ताभ्यां चटवर्गाभ्यां समानपदे चवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसस्थानः स्यात् । २१८. षकारान्नानापदेऽपि (च.आ. २.१.१६)। चवर्गीयस्य पूर्ववदिति । २१९. तवर्गीयाच्छकारः शकारस्य (च.आ. २.१.१७)। शरद् शशी । शर[च्]छशी । २२०. लोप उदः स्थास्तम्भोः सकारस्य (च.आ. १. २.१८)। उदः परयोः स्थास्तम्भोः सकारस्य लोपः स्यात् । उथ्थानम्186 । उत्थानम् । उत्तम्भनम् । २२१. पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विः (च.आ. ३.२. १)। पदान्ते यद् व्यञ्जनं तद् द्विर्भवति ह्रस्वानुनासिकस्वरात्परं187 चेत् ।

185Compare the example tallayaḥ in SK on P.8.4.60 (तोर्लि), p. 29. 186There is no way of deriving such a form either in the CA system, or in the Pāṇinian system. However, a form ut-th-thānam is derivable within the Pāṇi- nian system. P.8.4.61 (उदः स्थास्तम्भोः पूर्वस्य) does not prescribe the deletion of the initial s of the roots sthā and stambh, but the change of s to a sound homogeneous with the preceding, i.e. th. There is an option of deleting this th, but if one chooses not to delete it, then we are told that it must remain a th, and cannot be deaspirated, cf. SK on P.8.4.61, (p. 29): अत्राघोषस्य महाप्राणस्य सस्य तादृश एव थकारः । तस्य ‘झरो झरि’ इति पाक्षिको लोपः । लोपाभावपक्षे तु थकारस्यैव श्रवणं न तु ‘खरि च’ इति चर्त्वम् । चर्त्वं प्रति थकारस्यासिद्धत्वात् । However, this gives us the form ut-th-thānam, and not the form uth-thānam as it appears in the manuscript. 187The CAB does not have the condition ह्रस्वानुनासिकस्वरात् परं चेत्, and there is

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका673 २२२. ङणना ह्रस्वोपधाः स्वरे (च.आ. ३.२.२)। ह्रस्वस्वरः उपधा येषां ते ङणना वर्णाः स्वरे परे द्विर्भवन्ति । प्रत्यङ्ङुदेषि । आगमन्नापः । सुगण्णिह । वृत्रहणौ अत्र पदान्तत्वं न188 । प्राङास्ते अत्र ह्रस्वोपधत्वं न । २२३. छकारस्य189 (च.आ. ३.२.४)। ह्रस्वोपधाच्छकारस्य द्वित्वम् । ऋच्छति । पप्रच्छ । इच्छा । पुच्छमिति । २२४. पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात् (च.आ. ३.२.५)। पिप्पल्यादिषु मतेषु पूर्वात् दीर्घादपीत्यर्थः190 । आच्छिद्य । म्लेच्छः । लक्ष्मीच्छाया । २२५. मोऽनुस्वारः191 (not found in CA)। पदान्ते मकारव्यञ्जनस्यानुस्वारः स्यात् । रामं । गङ्गां । २२६. मकारस्य स्पर्शे परसस्थानः (च.आ. २.१.३१)। पदान्ते मकारस्यानु-

no basis for it either in the CA rules, or in Pāṇini. 188Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s commentary on PS 222 does not explicitly use the qualification padāntāḥ for ṅaṇanāḥ as is used by the CAB on CA (3.2.2). However, it is clear from the counter-example vr̥trahaṇau that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa intends such a qualification. 189This reading is supported by several manuscripts, while others support the reading छकारश्च. 190This interpretation cannot be correct, since it does not apply to the word pippalī itself. For further discussion, see the notes on CA (3.2.5). It is clear that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is looking for a way to get rules parallel to P.6.1.75 (दीर्घात्) and P.6.1.76 (पदान्ताद्वा). However, such a meaning cannot be extracted from PS 224 = CA (3.2.5). 191Compare P.8.3.23 (मोऽनुस्वारः). However, there is a difference in the way Kr̥ṣṇadāsa interprets this rule. He takes it as an unconditional rule, while the Pāṇinian commentators say that a word-final m changes to an anusvāra before a consonant, cf. SK on P.8.3.23 (p. 29): मान्तस्य पदस्यानुस्वारः स्याद्धलि । However, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa may have derived his notion of unconditionality of the word-final m from some non-Pāṇinian systems. The Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa (94: अवसाने वा) prescribes optional anusvāra for a prepausal m, and it (p. 15) further says: कौमारास्त्ववसानेऽप्यनुस्वारमिच्छन्ति । I do not find a rule like this in the Bibliotheca Indica edition of the Kātantra-Vyākaraṇa, though the Kātantrarūpamālāvyākaraṇa of Bhāvasena Traividyadeva has the rule (92, p. 16) विरामे वा. Finally, we should note that the CA does not use the term anu- svāra, and does not seem to recognize anusvāra as a nasal element added after a non-nasal vowel.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 674 स्वाराधिकारस्य स्पर्शे वर्णे परे परवर्णस्य सस्थानः पञ्चम एव भवति । तामूताङ्कालीं । अहञ्च त्वञ्च । कण्ठः । त्वण्डामरः षण्ढः शान्तं तन्तुं तनु (?)। माम्पालय । हुम्फट् । कृष्णम्भोजय । २२७. स्वरे मकारः192 (not found in CA)। स्वरे परेऽनुस्वारस्य मकारः । देवमर्च । कृष्णमिच्छ । गुरुमाश्रय । ऋतमृतम् । २२८. अन्तःस्थोष्मसु लोपः (च.आ. २.१.३२)। अन्तःस्थाभिः सहिता ये ऊष्माणस्तेषु परेषु च अन्तःस्थासु परासु चोष्मसु परेषु च पदान्तस्य मकारस्य लोपः स्यात् । सरूपाणामेकशेषादर्थद्वयम् । २२९. नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः (च.आ. १.३.५)। नकारमकारयोर्द्वयोरपि लोपे पूर्वस्वरस्य स्थानेऽनुना- सिकस्वरः स्यात् । किम् ह्यः । मकारलोपे पूर्वस्वरोऽनुनासिकः । २३०. संयोगादि (च.आ. ३.२.३, अंशः) इति यकारो द्विः । किँय्ह्यः193 । किँव्ह्वलयति । किँल्ह्लादयति । किँन्ह्नुते । अन्तस्थासु । सँयन्ता । सँवत्सरः । रामँ(K: मं) रट । कृष्णँ(K: ष्णं) लक्षयेति । उष्णँ(K: ष्णं) शीतं पिब । रिपुँ(K: पुं) षड्वर्गं जहि । शिवँ(K: वं) सन्धत्स्व । दुःखँ(K:

192There is no such rule either in CA or in Pāṇini. However, compare Sārasvata-vyākaraṇa (101: मः स्वरे). 193The forms such as kĩyhyaḥ are difficult to justify. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa says that after the deletion of m in kim+hyaḥ, the vowel preceding the m is nasalized, and then the initial consonant of the cluster is doubled yielding kĩyhyaḥ. Clearly, the initial consonant of the cluster is h, and not y. Thus, it seems obvious that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is misled by the late Indo-Aryan metathesized pronunciation of all old h-initial clusters. Thus, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is implicitly thinking of the forms pronounced as kĩyyhaḥ, kĩvvhalayati, kĩllhādayati, and kĩnnhute. According to Pāṇini 8.3.26-27 (हे मपरे वा, नपरे नः), the word-final m can be retained as m before hm, and can b e changed to n before hn. A Vārttika of Kātyāyana on P.8.3.26 reads यवलपरे यवला वा. This is taken to mean that a word-final m can be changed to ỹ, ṽ, and l̃, before hy, hv, and hl, respective- ly. However, this would provide the forms to be officially viewed as kiỹhyaḥ, kiṽhvalayati, kil̃hlādayati, and kinhute. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s error points to the fact as to how the changes occurring in the phonology of Sanskrit under the influence of MIA and NIA languages were beginning to confuse the grammarians. For the causation of these changes, see: Deshpande, (1983).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका675 खं) हन्त्यज । अनुस्वारस्य याजुषा रेफोष्मसु ँ् पठन्ते194 । २३१. ऊष्म- स्वेवान्तःपदे (च.आ. २.१.३३)। २३२. नकारस्य च (च.आ. २.१.३४)। नकारस्योष्मसु परेषु अन्तःपदे पदाभ्यन्तरे एव लोपो भवति पदान्ते न । चकारान्मकारस्यापि195 । उ° यशाँ(K: ां)सि । क्रँ(K: क्रं)- स्यते । मँ(K: मं)स्यते । मकारोदाहरणे पुँ(K: पुं)सि इति । २३३. उभयोर्लकारे लकारोऽनुनासिकः (च.आ. २.१.३५)। उभयोर्मकारन- कारयोः स्थाने लकारे परेऽनुनासिको लकारः स्यात् । उ° कृष्णल्ँलि(K: ष्णंल्लि) खामि । विद्वल्ँल(K: द्वंल्ल)क्षय । २३४. न समो राजतौ (च.आ. २.१.३६)। समः सम् इत्युपसर्गस्य मकारो व्यञ्जनं तस्य राजतौ धातुरूपे परे न लोपो भवति । तदा सम्राट् । सम्राज इति । २३५. सन्ध्ये च वकारे (च.आ. २.१.३७)। सन्धिभवो यो वकारस्त- स्मिन्परे मकारस्य लोपो न स्यात् । तम्वभि इति । २३६. वर्गविपर्यये स्फोटनः पूर्वेण चेद्विरामः (च.आ. २.१.३८)। वर्गविपर्यये सन्धिस्थे वर्णे परे सवर्णः स्फोटनो भवति । सन्ध्यक्षरं स्फोटयेत् । द्विधा कुर्यादिति । चेत्पूर्वेण पदान्तस्तदा । पदानां क्रमपाठे पादान्ते चोप-

194This is the sound called nāsikya or raṅga in the various texts. This sound is described as a pure nasal sound, with the complete blockage of the oral track. It involves the same sort of velar closure as involved in g, but then without releasing this closure and letting the air pass through the oral track, the air is expelled forcefully through the nasal passage. Neither Pāṇini, nor the CA provide for this sound. However, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa provides for it, probably under the influence of the Sārasvatavyākaraṇa (102, p. 16): ँ् छन्दसि । अनुस्वारश् छन्दसि ँ्कारमापद्यते शषसहरेफेषु परतः । चतुस्त्रि ँ्शद्वाजिनः । सामयजू ँ्षि । वय ँ् सोम । सि ँ्ह्यसि । देवाना ँ् राजा । 195This is an intriguing comment. In the original CA system, CA (2.1.33) applies to m, and CA (2.1.34) applies to n. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa seems to assume that both the rules basically apply to n, and are extended to m, on the basis of the word ca in CA 2.1.34. Such an interpretation may have been prompted by the analogy of P.8.4.24 (नश्चापदान्तस्य झलि). The SK on this rule (p. 29) reads: नस्य मस्य चापदान्तस्य झल्यनुस्वारः स्यात् । यशांसि । आक्रंस्यते । Kr̥ṣṇadāsa in fact seems to have borrowed the same examples.

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 676 योगोऽस्य196 । २३७. पुमो मकारस्य स्पर्शेऽघोषेऽनूष्मपरे विसर्जनीयः (च.आ. २.१.२५, अंशः)। पुमो मकारस्य स्थाने अघोषेऽनूष्मपरे स्पर्शे परे विसर्जनीयादेशः स्यात् द्वित्वं197 च । रेफसकारौ विसर्जनीयौ तयोः कस्यादेशः । ‘विसर्जनीयस्य सः’ (पा. ८.३.३४) इति पाणिनिः । २३८. समासे सकारः … (च.आ. २.३.३) इति सूत्रादत्रापि । पुंस्को- किलः । पुंश्चकोरः । पुंश्चली । पुंष्टिट्टिभः । पुंस्त्राता । पुंस्पुत्रः । अनूष्मपरे किम् । २३९. द्वितीयचतुर्थाः सोष्माणः (च.आ. १.१. १२) इति सूत्रवशात् द्वितीयवर्णवर्जिते इत्यर्थः । तेन पुंक्षीरं पुंख्यान- मित्यत्र198 सकारो न । २४०. संपर्युपेभ्यः करोतौ च क्वचित्199 (not

196The significance of this comment is not clear. None of the Śikṣās or Prātiśākhyas explain how and why the notion of sphoṭana is particularly useful in the Kramapāṭha and at the end of each metrical line (pādānta). It is possible that the word pādānta here is simply an error for padānta. 197The reference to dvitva or doubling is not immediately explicable. The CA rule (2.1.25) itself has no such context. It seems most probable that Kr̥ṣṇa- dāsa is referring to doubling of the kind discussed by Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita in the context of the form saṃskartā, cf. SK on P. 8.3.34 (p. 31). 198The word puṃkṣīra is excluded from the scope of PS 237 (= CA 2.1.25) by the condition anūṣmapare, since the voiceless stop k is followed here by the spirant (ūṣman) ṣ. The example puṃkhyānam is an interesting case. To fit this case in the exclusion anūṣmapare in CA (2.1.25), Kr̥ṣṇadāsa would like to claim that the voiceless aspirate stops also come under the term ūṣman, and are therefore excluded. This blurs the distinction between ūṣman and soṣman, and also fudges the interpretation of anūṣmapare. That phrase in its own context refers to ‘before a voiceless stop which is not followed by an ūṣman.’ Thus, it will not apply to the case of kh in any case. To exclude the case of puṃkhyānam, Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita cites an apocryphal Vārttika : khyāñ- ādeśe na, cf. SK on P.8.3.6 (p. 32). This Vārttika is not found in the MB or the KV. It probably goes back to the comment ख्याधातौ नेति केचित् in the Prakriyākaumudī on P.8.3.4 (Vol.I., p. 155). Referring to this phrase, Śrīkr̥ṣṇa remarks in his Prakāśa (ibid, p. 158): केचिदिति । भाष्यकारादन्य इति व्याचक्षते । … तस्मात्परमताभिप्रायेणैवेदमुक्तं न सिद्धार्थ इत्येवं युक्तमालोचयामः । For further discussion on these examples, see the notes on CA (2.1.25). 199Compare P.6.1.137 (सम्परिभ्यां करोतौ भूषणे) and P.6.1.39 (उपात्प्रतियत्नवैकृत- वाक्याध्याहारेषु च). By omitting the semantic condition, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa creates an

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका677 found in CA)। सम् । परि । उप । एभ्य उपसर्गेभ्यः करोतौ करोतौ परे आदेशादि पूर्ववत् । सँस्कारः । संस्कृतम् । अभावे संकरश्च200 । २४१. नाम्युपधस्य सस्य षकारः (not found in CA)। परिष्कारः । अभावे परिकरः । उपस्करम् । उपकारः । इति । २४२. नकारस्य चटतवर्गेषु (च.आ. २.१.२६)। २४३. अघोषेषु (not found in CA)। नकार- व्यञ्जनस्य स्थानेऽघोषेषु चटतवर्गेषु परेषु सः स्यात् । परस्य स्थान एव । २४४. नकारस्य च (च.आ. २.१.३४) इति सूत्रात्201 । भगवाँ- श्चरति । विप्राँश्छन्दयते । भवाँष्टीकते । भवाँष्ठीवते । भवाँस्तरति । देवाँस्थगयति । शार्ङ्गिँश्छिन्धि । चक्रिँस्त्रायस्व202 । २४५. नान्तःपदे सन्ध्ये तकारे च (not found in CA)। पदमध्ये सकारो न स्यात् सन्धिस्थे संयुक्ते तकारे च । हन्ति । सन्त्सरुः । सन्त्स्तौतीति203 । २४६. उः पाकारे उपध्मा वा204 (not found in CA)। २४७. स्वतवसः पाया-

optional rule. There are good grounds for doing it. For example, note Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita’s comment in his SK on P.6.1.138 (p. 414): संपूर्वस्य क्वचिद- भूषणेऽपि सुट् । ‘संस्कृतं भक्षाः’ इति ज्ञापकात् । Another point to note is that the KV reading for P.6.1.137 is सम्परिभ्यां करोतौ भूषणे, and could be a probable source for Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s reading. The KV also notes: संपूर्वस्य क्वचिदभूषणेऽपि सुडिष्यते संस्कृतमन्नमिति । The word kvacit is used by both the KV and the SK. 200Kr̥ṣṇadāsa seems to derive the word saṃkara from sam+karoti, and accounts for it by saying that there is absence of the insertion of s because of the provision of kvacit. Other grammarians preferred to derive this word from sam+kirati and derived words like saṃkr̥ti on another basis, cf. Cāndravyākaraṇa (on rule 5.1.136, Vol.II., p. 155): संकृतिरिति गर्गादिपाठात् सिद्धम् । सङ्कारः सङ्कर इति किरतेर्घञपौ बहुलाधिकारात् । 201The CAB on CA (2.1.34) interprets it in such a way that it applies only word-internally (अन्तःपदे). If that interpretation is valid, then the rule will not apply to the cases of external sandhi cited by Kr̥ṣṇadāsa. 202The two final examples are probably taken from the SK on P.8.3.7 (p. 32) 203The two initial examples are probably taken from the SK on P.8.3.7 (p. 32): नश्छव्यप्रशान् । ८.३.७ । अम्परे छवि नकारान्तस्य पदस्य रुः स्यात् । …पदस्य किम् । हन्ति । अम्परे किम् । सन्त्सरुः । 204Compare P.8.3.10 (नॄन्पे). The upadhmānīya is derived in the Pāṇinian system by the generic rule P.5.3.37 (कुप्वोः ᳲक ᳲपौ च). However, note that

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 678 देव205 (not found in CA)। नकारान्तादृकारात् पाकारे परे उपध्मा वा स्यात् । नॄँᳲपात्रम् । नॄँᳲपाहि । स्वतवच्छब्दात् पायौ उपध्मा वा स्यात् । ‘स्वत॑वाँᳲपा॒युः’ (ऋग्वेद ४.२.६) इति । २४८. नाम्युपधस्य रेफः (च.आ. २.१.२९ अंशः)। नाम्युपधस्य पदान्तनकारस्य स्वरे परे रेफः स्यात्206 । ‘ऋ॒तूँरनु॑’ (ऋग्वेद १.१५.५) । हरीँरेति । ‘पि॒तॄँरुप॑’ (अ.वे. १८.२.४) । ‘स त्रीँरे॑काद॒शाँ इ॒ह’ (ऋग्वेद ८.३९.९) । २४९. ऋतूँरुत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम् (च.आ. २.१.२९, अंशः)। २५०. न समैरयन्तादीनाम् (च.आ. २.१.३०)। स्पष्टमिदं सूत्रम् । २५१. आकारोपधस्योपबद्धादीनां स्वरे (च.आ. २.१.२७)। देवान् एतु इति स्थिते आकारोपधस्य नकारस्य स्थाने उपबद्धादीनामुपसर्गनिपातधातुस- म्बन्धिनां पदानां स्वरे परे विसर्जनीयः स्यात् । देवा एतु । २५२. विसर्गस्य स्वरे यकारः207 (not found in CA)। देवायेतु । २५३. स्वराद्यवयोः पदान्तयोः (च.आ. २.१.२१) लोपः । २५४. यवलोपे (च.आ. ३.२.१२) प्रकृत्या स्वरस्तिष्ठति । देवा एतु । नकारस्थानी- ययकारलोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः देवाँ एतु सिद्धम् । ‘अग्ने॑ दे॒वाँ इ॒हा व॑ह’ (अ.वे. २०.१०१.३)208। २५५. वृक्षाँ वनानीति वकारे (च.आ. २.१.२८)। इति वकारे नस्याभिनिष्ठानं स्यात् । २५६. आकारोपध-

Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita juxtaposes these two rules and offers the example nr̥̄̃ᳲpāhi. 205Compare P.8.3.11 (स्वतवान्पायौ). 206The CAB offers a somewhat different interpretation of rule CA (2.2.3: नाम्यु- पधस्य रेफः): नाम्युपधस्य विसर्जनीयस्य स्वरे परतः रेफो भवति । This rule is given in Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s work as PS 268. However, the identical looking rule given here is not CA (2.2.3), but the initial portion of CA (2.1.29) नाम्युपधस्य रेफ ऋतूँत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम्. As noted under CA (2.1.29), a significant number of manuscripts place a daṇḍa after rephaḥ in this rule, suggesting that this is a separate rule. Thus, this may not be a new initiative on the part of Kr̥ṣṇa- dāsa. 207This is just an expanded version of CA (2.2.2: स्वरे यकारः). 208It should be noted that while the CA and the CAB do not betray any famili- arity with the 19th and the 20th Kāṇḍa of the ŚAV, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s example occurs in the 20th Kāṇḍa. However, it is also found in RV (1.12.3a).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका679 स्याभिनिष्ठानस्य लोपः209 (not found in CA)। २५७. घोषवति परे210 (not found in CA)। २५८. सस्थाने लोपेऽनुनासिकः211 (not found in CA)। वृक्षाँ विमृश । ‘द॒द्वाँ वा॒ यत्’ (ऋग्वेद १०.१३२.३) इति । एषां विसर्गादेशानां विकल्पः सर्वत्र212 । २५९. न टवर्गस्य चवर्गे काल- विप्रकर्षस्त्वत्र भवति तमाहुः कर्षण इति (च.आ. २.१.३९)। टवर्ग- स्य चवर्गे परे कालविप्रकर्षो नाम उच्चारणकाले मात्राधिक्यं न भवति । तं कर्षण इत्याहुः । इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्सव्याकरणे व्यञ्जनसन्धिः । [विसर्गसन्धिप्रकरणम्] अथ विसर्गसन्धिः । २६०. विसर्जनीयस्य परसस्थानोऽघोषे (च.आ. २.२.१)। विसर्जनीयस्योष्मणः श्वासस्य परसस्थानः अघोषे परे सति । कखयोः परयोश्चेत् । शषसहा ऊष्माणः । तेष्वत्र कः । अकुह- विसर्जनीयानां कण्ठः । विसर्गो नाम किञ्चित् ईषत् हकारसदृशः श्वासै- कदेशः । कण्ठेऽपि जिह्वामूले कवर्गोच्चारात्213 । जिह्वामूले एवार्धविसर्ग- रूपः श्वासः प्रयोक्तव्यः214 आᳲ कᳲ खनतीति215 । चछयोः परयोः

209This is just an expansion of CA (2.2.16: आकारोपधस्य लोपः). 210This may not be an independent rule, but a part of the explanation of PS 256. Compare घोषवति परतः in the CAB on CA (2.2.16). 211This probably refers to PS 229 = CA 1.3.5: नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः. 212The CA system does not provide such an option. However, Kr̥ṣṇadāsa is probably referring to the option of having either vr̥kṣān or vr̥kṣā̃. before vimr̥śa. The CA is far more specific. See the notes on CA (2.1.28). 213This shows an effort to patch two different points of articulation for k, i.e. kaṇṭha vs jihvāmūla. It looks like Kr̥ṣṇadāsa feels some concern as to how the visarga could change to a jihvāmūlīya before a kaṇṭhya k. 214This refers to the pronunciation of jihvāmūlīya. The sounds upadhmānīya and jihvāmūlīya are referred to as ardhavisargasadr̥śa in the SK on P.8.2.1 (p. 6): ᳲकᳲपाविति कपाभ्यां प्रागर्धविसर्गसदृशौ जिह्वामूलीयोपध्मानीयौ । Bhaṭṭoji’s own commentary Prauḍhamanoramā (p. 50) explains that this halfway simi- larity between the visarga and these two sounds is based both on their pro- nunciation and writing: सादृश्यमुच्चारणे लेखने च बोध्यम् । The commentary

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 680 शकारस्य सस्थानत्वात् कश्चरति । कृष्णश्छत्रं नः । टठयोः षकार ऊष्मण आदेशः धनुषष्टङ्कारः । तथयोः सकारः । कृष्णस्तारकः । पफयोः उप- ध्मानीयोऽर्धविसर्गः । कृष्णᳲ पातु माम् । बुद्धिᳲ फलम् । शषसेषु विभा- षा पाणिनीये216 । हरिः शेते । हरिश्शेते इति ज्ञेयम्217 । २६१. संयुक्ते स्वेन धर्मेण218 (not found in CA)। संयुक्ते वर्गे परे विसर्ग ऊष्मधर्मेणैव तिष्ठते । कः त्सरुः । देवः क्षरति । रामः स्थाता । हरिः स्फुरति । अत्र सस्थानत्वं न । कस्कादिषु सकारनिपातनात् कस्कः कौतस्कुतः काँस्कानिति219 । २६२. रेफसकारयोर्विसर्गः पदान्ते220 (not found in CA)। स्पष्टं सूत्रम् । २६३. स्वरे यकारः (च.आ. २.२.२)। विस- र्जनीयस्य स्वरे यकारः स्यात् । देवाः आगताः । अत्राभिनिष्टानस्य यकारः । देवायागताः इति । २६४. यवलोपे (च.आ. ३.२.१२)। यकार- वकारयोर्लोपे स्वरः प्रकृत्या तिष्ठति । देवा आगताः । एवमेव सन्ध्यक्षराणां स्थाने अय् अव् आय् आव् एतेषु प्रत्ययेषु परेषु विधिः उ°221 ते आगत[ाः?] । अय् तयागत[ाः?] । त आगता वसेति(?)। तस्मै आसनं तस्मायासनम् आय् लो°222 तस्मा आसनम् । अवावोर्लोपस्तु । उओऔषु । ओष्ठ्यस्वरेषु एव नान्यत्र223 । उ° ‘श॒त॒क्र॒त॒

Laghuśabdaratna (ibid.) explains this statement: उच्चारणेति । पादमात्रिकौ इमौ इति भावः । लेखने चेति । अर्धवृत्तद्वयात्मकलिपित्वादिति भावः । 215The example कᳲखनति is found in the SK on P.8.3.36 (p. 33). 216This refers to P.8.3.36 (वा शरि). 217These examples are probably taken from the SK on P.8.3.36 (p. 33). 218Compare P.8.3.35 (शर्परे विसर्जनीयः). 219Compare P.8.3.48 (कस्कादिषु च), and the SK (p. 32) on it for the examples. The kaskādigaṇa is also referred to in PS 279 below. 220This rule seems to combine P.8.2.66 (ससजुषो रुः) and P.8.3.15 (खरवसानयो- र्विसर्जनीयः). 221Expand to udāharaṇam. 222Expand to lopaḥ. 223This practice is specifically mentioned in the RPR (2.31: ओष्ठ्ययोन्योर्भुग्नम- नोष्ठ्ये वकारोऽत्रान्तरागमः). However, the RPR rules are structured in a reverse way. The RPR rule (2.25-28) say that ai and au are changed to ā before vowels, and e and o are changed to a before vowels. However, before non-

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका681 उत्’ (ऋग्वेद १.१०.१)। ‘इ॒न्द॒ ओजि॑ष्ठः’ (ऋग्वेद ९.६६.१६)। भानौ औन्नत्यं भाना औन्नत्यम् । अभावोदाहरणे । ‘इन्द॒विन्द्रा॑य’ (ऋग्वेद ९.६९.१०)। ‘वाय॒-वा या॑हि’ (ऋग्वेद १.२.१)। ‘इ॒न्द॒वे॒षा॒म्’ (ऋग्वेद ९.५२.४) इति । २६५. नाम्युपधस्य रेफः (च.आ. २.२.३)। नाम्युपधस्याभिनिष्ठानस्य स्वरे रेफः स्यात् । उ° अग्निरेतु । विष्णुरायातु । दीर्घे तु नदीः चमूः मातॄः श्रीरिति । २६६. घोषवति च (च.आ. २.२.४)। नाम्युपधस्य रेफः । २६७. अकारोपधस्योकारोऽकारे (च.आ. २.२.१४)। अकारो-पधस्य विसर्गस्य उकारो भवति अकारे परे । कृष्णः अर्भः इति पूर्वपर-योरेकादेशाद्विसर्गोपधस्योकारे जाते । एकारौकारान्तात्पदादेरकारस्य पूर्वरूप एकादेशात्कृष्णोऽर्भ इति । २६८. क्वचित् प्रकृत्या (च.आ. ३.२. ३१)। देवो अत्र गच्छति । मेषे अर्कः । २६९. आकारोपधस्य लोपः (च.आ. २.२.१६)। अत्र विसर्गस्य लोपः स्यात् स्वरे परे । विप्रा आयाताः । २७०. घोषवति च (च.आ. २.२.१४)। अकारोपधस्य विसर्गस्य उकारो भवति । चकारादाकारोपधस्य लोपो भवति पुनश्चकारा-दुत्वं घोषान्तस्थाहकारेषु अत्रैवाकारोपधस्य लोपः लोको गच्छति । वीरो जयति देवो ददाति । भक्तो यजति । मनोरथः । चौरो वञ्चयति दुष्टो हसति । देवा यान्ति । भक्ता भजन्ति । चौरा रुदन्ति । धन्या हसन्ति इति । २७१. एषस्यस व्यञ्जने (च.आ. २.२.१८, पाठान्तरम्)। व्यञ्जने परे एषः स्यः सः एषां पदानां विसर्गलोपः । ‘राजन् स चैष ते पुत्रः स्य बन्धुः स्य पिता तव’ (source?)। २७२. स्वरे यत्वं तल्लोपश्च (not found in CA)। अकारे उकारः । ‘सोऽहमेषोऽर्कतुल्यः स्यां स्योऽग्निवद्रिपुवृन्दधृक्’ (source?)। २७३. नञि व्यञ्जनेऽपि224 (not found in CA)। नञि समासे व्यञ्जनेऽप्युत्वम् । अनेषो गच्छति । २७४. शषसेषु विसर्गः (not found

labial vowels, there an insertion jof v after a and ā derived from labial sounds. Note that all the cited examples come from the RV, rather than from the AV. Also consider the examples वाय॑ उ॒क्थेभिः॑ (RV 1.2.2), वाय॒विन्द्र॑श्च (RV 1.2.5-6), ऋ॒ता॒वृ॒धा॒वृ॒त॒स्पृ॒शा॒ (RV 1.2.8), and तु॒वि॒जा॒ता उ॑रु॒क्षया॑ (RV 1.2.9). 224Compare P.6.1.132 (एतत्तदोः सुलोपोऽकोरनञ्समासे हलि).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 682 in CA)। असः शिवः । २७५. न सस्य दीर्घः (not found in CA)। सकारस्थानीयविसर्गलोपे पूर्वस्वरस्य दीर्घो न । उदा° २७६. दीर्घायुत्वायादिषु च (च.आ. २.२.२०)। २७७. केवल उकारः स्वरपूर्वः (च.आ. ३.२.१३)। ‘ए॒ष उ॒ स्यः’ (ऋग्वेद ९.३.१०)। स उ एकाग्निः (?)। स्वरपूर्वः केवल उकारः स्वरूपेणैव तिष्ठते । २७८. भोभगोअघोसां शषसेषु न विसर्गश्च लोपः225 (not found in CA)। २७९. कस्कादीनां पुमो न226 (not found in CA)। अधीहि भोः सावित्रीम् । भोभगोसोर्बृहस्पतेः । वाचस्पतेस्तस्करस्य सकारस्तु निपातजः227 । अथ सकारनिपाताः । २८०. दुर उकारो दाशे परस्य मूर्धन्यः (च.आ. २.३.१)। दुरोऽभिनिष्टानस्थाने उकारः दाशे परे परस्य दस्य डकारादेशः । दु उ डाशः सवर्णे दीर्घः दूडाशः । २८१. दभधीनाशेषु च228 (not found in CA)। दूडभम् । दूढ्यम् । दूणाशम् । २८२. शुनि तकारः (च.आ. २.३.२)। दुरो विसर्गस्य तकारः शुनि परे । दुत् शुनः । परसस्थानत्वादुच्छुनः । २८३. समासे सकारः कपयोरनन्तः सद्यःश्रेयश्छन्दसाम् (च.आ. २.३.३)। तकारस्य स्थाने कपयोः परयोः अनन्तः पदमध्ये समासे सति सकारादेशः स्यात् । तत् करः तकारस्य सकारादेशे तस्करः । पे परे बृहत्पतिः । बृहस्पतिः । सद्यस्कालः । श्रेयस्कामः । छन्दस्पदम् । २८४. निर्दुराविर्हविरसमासेऽ- पि (च.आ. २.३.४)। एतानि पदानि असमासेऽपि विसर्गस्थाने सत्वं भजन्ते कपयोः परत्र । निष्कृतिः। निष्पत्रम् । दुष्कृतिः । आविष्कारः । हविष्पात्रम् । एषु विकल्पश्च229 । षकारो नाम्युपधत्वात्230 । २८५. सान्तेभ्यः कुप्वोः231

225Compare P.8.3.17 (भोभगोअघोअपूर्वस्य योऽशि). 226Compare P.8.3.48 (कस्कादिषु च) and P.8.3.6 (पुमः खय्यम्परे). Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s rule seems to be a combination of these two. 227For the forms taskara and br̥haspati, see Vārttika : तद्बृहतोः करपत्योश्चोरदेवत- योः सुट् तलोपश्च on P.6.1.157. 228 Compare the addendum quoted in the CAB on CA (2.3.1). Also compare the Vārttika (दुरो दाशनासदभध्येषु) on P.6.3.109. Also see the notes on CA (2.3.1). 229The CA rules do not seem to offer any option. However, I suspect that

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका683 (not found in CA)। यावत्सकारस्थानीयः विसर्गः अन्ते येषां तेभ्यः पदेभ्यः कवर्गपवर्गयोः सकारः । पयस्पानम् । ‘द्विस्त्रिश्चतुरिति कृत्वोऽर्थे’ (पा. ८.३.४३) इति पाणिनिः । २८६. त्रिः (च.आ. २.३.५)। २८७. कुरुकरंकरत्कृणोतुकृतिकृधिष्वकर्णयोः (च.आ. २.३.६)। २८८. ततस्परौ ब्रह्मपरे (च.आ. २.३.७)। २८८. ततस्परि232 । २८९. पञ्चम्याश्चाङ्गेभ्यः पर्यादिवर्जम् (च.आ. २.३.८)। २९०. दिवस्पदे (not found in CA)। २९१. दिवस्पृष्ठम् (not found in CA)। २९२. दिवस्पृथिव्यां सचतिवर्जम् (च.आ. २.३.९)। २९३. पृष्ठे च (च.आ. २.३.१०)। पृथिव्यास्पृष्ठे233 । २९४. यः पतौ गवामस्याः परवर्जम् (च.आ. २.३.११)। गोष्पदे । गोष्पतिः234 । २९५. षष्ठ्याश्चाशच्याः (च.आ. २.३.१२)। २९६. इडायास्पदे (च.आ. २.३.१३)। २९७. पितुः पितरि (च.आ. २.३.१४)। ‘पि॒तुष्पि॒ता’

Kr̥ṣṇadāsa’s notion that there is an option may have been derived from the Pāṇinian system. P.8.3.45 (नित्यं समासेऽनुत्तरपदस्थस्य) prescribes obligatory cerebralization in compounds, while P.8.3.44 (इसुसोः सामर्थ्ये) is traditionally interpreted in such a way that even when there is no compounding, there can be optional cerebralization, if there is semantic-syntactic connection between the constituents of an expression. See the SK on P.8.3.44 (p. 34): एतयोर्विस- र्जनीयस्य षः स्याद्वा कुप्वोः । … सामर्थ्यमिह व्यपेक्षा ।. It should also be noted that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa has offered only the examples of compounded expressions. The condition असमासेऽपि demands that one offer examples of uncompounded expressions as well. See the notes on CA (2.3.4). 230This refers to CA (2.4.1: अत्र नाम्युपधस्य षकारः). 231Compare P.8.3.38 (सोऽपदादौ). 232The manuscript K smears this segment with yellow color, indicating that this is a rule. It may either be a corrupt repetition of the preceding, or perhaps an example of the preceding rule. See the CAB on CA (2.3.7) for the example tatas pari. 233This cannot be an example of CA (2.3.10), unless it is taken out of its origi- nal context. See the CAB on CA (2.3.10). 234The rule PS 294 (= CA 2.3.11) has something to do with the expression yas patiḥ, and nothing to do with the forms goṣpade and goṣpatiḥ. Kr̥ṣṇadāsa has evidently misunderstood the rule. See the notes on CA (2.3.11).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 684 (अ.वे. २.१.२) । पितुष्पुत्रः235 । २९८. द्यौश्च (च.आ. २.३.१५)। ‘द्यौष्पितः॑’ (अ.वे. ६.४.३) । २९९. आयुः प्रथमे (च.आ. २.३.१६)। ३००. प्रे मुषिजीवपरे (च.आ. २.३.१७)। ३०१. परिधिः पतातौ (च.आ. २.३.१८)। ३०२. निवतस्पृणातौ (च.आ. २.३.१९)। ३०३. मनस्पापे (च.आ. २.३.२०)। ३०४. रायस्पोषादिषु च (च.आ. २.३.२१)। अथ रेफान्तानि । ३०५. रेफप्रकृति घोषवत्स्वरेषु (not found in CA)। रेफः प्रकृतिः पदान्तो यस्य तद् घोषवत्सु च स्वरेषु च रेफित्वेनैव तिष्ठते । हरिर्गच्छति । भानुरायातु236 । अग्निवृत्तिः237 । धूर्जटिः । धूःपतिः । धूष्पतिः । धूर्पतिः238 । ३०५. अहरादीनां पत्यादेर्विभाषा239 (not found in CA)। अहःपतिः । अहर्पतिः । गीःपतिः । गीष्पतिः । गीर्पतिः । धूःसु । धूर्षु । ३०६. अव्ययानि च (not found in CA)। ३०७. आवःकरकश्च विवरबिभरसर्वनाम्नः (च.आ. २.२.५)। ३०८. द्वार्वा-रिति (च.आ. २.२.६)। ३०९. अजह्यतेरहाः240 (च.आ. २.२.७, पाठान्तरम्)।

235This expression cannot be an example of PS 297 (= CA 2.3.14). The kaskādigaṇa lists the expression bhrātuṣputraḥ. The example pituḥputraḥ as an aluk-compound, in the sense of पितुरन्तेवासी, is cited under P.6.3.23 (ऋतो विद्यायोनिसम्बन्धेभ्यः) in the KV. 236The examples हरिर्गच्छति and भानुरायातु cannot be treated as examples of a rephaprakr̥ti type. 237This looks like an unrelated intrusion. 238This example is cited in the SK (p. 37) under P.8.2.69 (रोऽसुपि) to illustrate the Vārttika (अहरादीनां पत्यादिषु वा रेफः). 239Compare the Vārttika (अहरादीनां पत्यादिषु वा रेफः) cited by the SK on P.8.2.69. It originates in the MB statement अहरादीनां पत्यादिषूपसंख्यानं कर्तव्यम् on P.8.2.70, which is not given as a Vārttika by Kielhorn, but is treated as such by the KV and the SK. The examples aharpatiḥ and gīrpatiḥ go back to the MB on P.8.2.70, and are found in the later commentaries. The example dhūḥsu / dhūrṣu is not related to this rule. 240This reading for CA (2.2.7) is found in a number of manuscripts, though the example ajarghāḥ has nothing to do with this rule. See the notes on CA (2.2.7).

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका685 अजर्घाः । ३१०. एकामन्त्रिते रौद्विवचनान्तस्य (च.आ. २.२.८)। ३११. अन्तःपुनःप्रातःसनुतःस्वरव्ययानाम् (च.आ. २.२. ९)। ३१२. स्वर्षाश्च (च.आ. २.२.१०)। ३१३. अहर्नपुंसकम् (च.आ. २.२.११)। अहन् नपुंसकम् । तत्र प्रथमैकवचने रेफादेशः । अहरहः । अहर्गणः । कुप्वोर्वा रेफः । अहःपतिः । अहर्पतिरिति । ३१४. न विभक्तिरूपरात्रिरथन्तरेषु (च.आ. २.२.१२)। एतेषु परेषु अह्नो नकारस्य रेफादेशो न । किञ्च सकारादेशः स्यात् । घोषवति तस्योत्वं च । अहोभ्याम् अहोभिरिति अहोरात्रे । अहोरूपम् अहोरथ-न्तरम् । ३१५. ऊधोऽम्नोभुवसाम् (च.आ. २.२.१३)। ऊधः अम्नः भुवः एषां सान्तानां पदानां क्वचिद्रेफादेशोऽन्ते । ‘अम्नरूधरवरित्युभयथा छन्दसि’ (पा. ८.२.७०) इति पाणिनिः । ३१६. भुवोमहसोर्लोके (not found in CA)। लोके परे भुवोमहसोः सस्य रेफः । भुवर्लोकः । मह-र्लोकः । ३१७. उषसो वसूयुबुधयोः (not found in CA)। उषसो विस-र्जनीयस्य सस्य रेफः वसूयुबुधयोः परयोः । ‘उ॒ष॒र्व॒सू॒यवः॑’ (ऋग्वेद १.४९. ४)। ‘उ॒ष॒र्बुध॒ आ व॑ह’ (ऋग्वेद १.४४.९)। लोप इत्यनुवृत्त्या ३१८. रेफस्य रेफे (च.आ. २.१.१९)। रेफधर्मिणः पदान्तस्य विसर्गस्य रेफे परे लोपः स्यात् । ३१९. दीर्घः (च.आ. ३.१.१, अंशः) ३२०. आदिषु (च.आ. ३.१.४, अंशः, or ३.१.१६, अंशः) इति अनुवृत्ते ३२१. रलोपे (च.आ. ३.१.२०)। रेफलोपे आदिषु समानाक्षरेषु दीर्घः स्यात् । प्रातः रत्नम् इत्यत्र प्रातरिति रेफिविसर्गलोपे पूर्वस्वरस्य दीर्घः । प्राता रत्नम् । हरी राजते । शंभू रमते । स्वसॄ रक्षते । कवे राष्ट्रम् । उच्चै रौतीति । ३२२. एषस व्यञ्जने (च.आ. २.२.१८)। व्यञ्जन-मात्रे वर्णे परे एषसयोर्विसर्गस्य लोपः स्यात् । असंपर्कयोः । स खनति । स चरति । एष छ(ा?)दयते । स्य फणी । स पविः । ‘ए॒ष उ॒ स्य वृषा॒ रथः॑’ (ऋग्वेद ९.३८.१)। असंपर्कयोः किम् । स्वार्थे कप्रत्ययेन अथ च नञ्समाससम्बन्धरहितयोः241 । एषको रुद्रः । असः शिव इति । व्यञ्जने

241Compare P.6.1.132 (एतत्तदोः सुलोपोऽकोरनञ्समासे हलि), and the examples cited on this rule in the SK (p. 39).

कौत्सव्याकरणे पञ्चसन्धिः 686 इति किम् । तर्हि नामिषु यत्वम् अनामिनि उत्वम् । एष इन्द्रः । एषोऽ- र्कः । स एति । सोऽयम् । ३२३. न सस्य दीर्घः (not found in CA)। सकारस्थानीयविसर्गलोपे पूर्वस्य दीर्घो न । उदाहरणं ३२४. दीर्घायुत्वा- यादिषु च (च.आ. २.२.२०)। अत्र विसर्गलोपः प्रातिज्ञ एव । न तु सौत्रः विसर्गलोपे न पुनः स्वरैः सन्धिः । दृश्यते च वैदिके पादपूरणे । ‘सेमाम॑विड्ढि’ (ऋग्वेद २.२४.१)। ‘सेदु॒ राजा॑ क्षयति’ (ऋग्वेद १.३२. १५)। ‘सोऽचि लोपे चेत्पादपूरणम्’ (पा. ६.१.१३४) इति पाणिनिः । पादपूरणाभावे । ‘स इत् क्षे॑ति’ (ऋग्वेद ४.५०.८) इत्युदाहृतिः । आर्षे- ष्वपि क्वचित् । सैष दाशरथी रामः सैष राजा युधिष्ठिरः । सैष कर्णो महात्यागी सैष भीमो महाबलः ॥ इति ॥ इत्यादिपादपूरणार्थः सन्धिः । यदुक्तं लौकिकायेह तद्वेदे बहुलं भवेत् । सेमां भूम्याददे सोषामित्यादीनामदुष्टता ॥ क्वचित्प्रवृत्तिः क्वचिदप्रवृत्तिः क्वचिद्विभाषा क्वचिदन्यदेव । विधेर्विधानं बहुधा समीक्ष्य चतुर्विधं बाहुलकं वदन्ति ॥ वर्णागमो वर्णविपर्ययश्च द्वौ चापरौ वर्णविकारनाशौ । धातोस्तदर्थातिशयेन योगस्तदुच्यते पञ्चविधं निरुक्तम् ॥ वर्णागमो गवेन्द्रादौ सिंहे वर्णविपर्ययः । षोडशादौ विकारः स्याद्वर्णनाशः पृषोदरे ॥ वर्णे विकारनाशाभ्यां धातोरतिशयेन यः । योगः स उच्यते प्राज्ञैर्मयूरभ्रमरादिषु ॥242

242All these verses, beginning with सैष दाशरथी … etc. are cited from the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa. They occur in the commentary on Sārasvata- Vyākaraṇa (1.118-9, pp. 17-8). I have corrected the text as given in the manuscript K by using the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa. Especially, note the corrupt reading सेंमा भूम्पाददे which is now corrected to सेमां भूम्याददे. The expression semām refers to the irregular sandhi of saḥ+imām. The expression bhūmy- ādade refers to the irregular sandhi of bhūmiḥ+ādade. The expression soṣām

शौनकीया चतुराध्यायिका687 यदुक्तमाचार्येण । ३२५. चतुर्णां पदजातानां नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातानां सन्ध्यपद्यौ गुणौ प्रातिज्ञम् (च.आ. १.१.२)। तत्र सन्ध्यो गुणः पञ्च- विधो व्याख्यातः । पद्यो द्विविधः । सिद्धः साध्यश्च । तौ प्रसङ्गप्रकरणे243 व्याचिख्यास्यामः । इति श्रीमदथर्वकौत्सव्याकरणे विसर्गसन्धिः पञ्चमः244 । ________________________________

refers to the irregular sandhi of saḥ+uṣām. All these verses are explained at length in the commentary Candrakīrti on the Sārasvata-Vyākaraṇa, (part I, pp. 42-44). 243This is significant in that it indicates that Kr̥ṣṇadāsa had probably composed further sections of this work. However, I was not able to find any manu- scripts of these portions. 244After this follows the final segment in red letters added by the copyist: संवत् १९२० । शके १७८५ । कार्तिकमासे शुक्लपक्षे तिथौ पञ्चम्याया रविवासरे तद्दिणे इदं पुस्तकं तिवाडि इत्युपनाम आत्मारामेन लिखितं । शुभं भवतु । ॐ नमो भगवते वासु- देवाय नमः । श्रीरामचन्द्राय नमः । ग्रंथसंख्या । श्लोकसंख्या । ६०० । पत्रसंख्या ३६ । The manuscript was received by the Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍala, Pune, from the Gore family of Sangli in southern Maharashtra. However, it appears that the manuscript was copied most probably in Gujarat by a person named Ātmārāma Tivāḍi.

Bibliography & Abbreviations Abhyankar, K.V. 1974. Vedapadapāṭhacarcā, with Upalekhasūtra. Post Graduate and Research Department Series. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Abhyankar, K.V. and Shukla J.M. 1977. A Dictionary of Sanskrit Grammar. Gaekwad’s Oriental Series 134. 1st edn. 1961. 2nd revised edition 1977. Baroda. Abhyankar, S.R. 1984. “Introduction to the Commentary Prātiśākhya Jyotsnā.” In The Proceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 31st Session, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, October 1982, pp. 167- 177. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Aitareya Āraṇyaka. With parts of the Śāṃkhāyana-Āraṇyaka. Edited and translated by Arthur B. Keith. 1909. London: Oxford University Press. Aitareyabrāhmaṇa (AB). Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series, No. 31, Pts. I-II. 1896. Pune: Ānandāśrama. Aithal, Paramesvara. 1991. Vedalakṣaṇa: Vedic Ancillary Literature. A Descriptive Bibliography. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Akkole, Subhashchandra. 1968. Prācīn Marāṭhī Jain Sāhitya (in Marathi). Nagpur: Suvichar Prakashan Mandal. Allen, W.S. 1953. Phonetics in Ancient India. London Oriental Series, Vol- ume I. London: Oxford University Press. ———-. 1962. Sandhi: The theoretical, phonetic, and historical bases of word-junction in Sanskrit. The Hague: Mouton. Amarakośa, by Amarasiṃha, with the commentary of Kṣīrasvāmin. Edited by H.D. Sharma. 1941. Pune: Oriental Book Agency. Aniṅyam, ed. by V. Venkataram Sharma. 1932. Madras: Univ. of Madras. Āpastambīyagr̥hyasūtra. Edited by M. Winternitz. Vienna, 1887. Āpastambaśrautasūtra. Edited by Richard Garbe. Bibliotheca Indica, 3 volumes. Calcutta, 1882, 1885, 1892. Āpiśaliśikṣā. In Śikṣāsūtrāṇi, Āpiśali-Pāṇini-Candragomi-viracitāni. Edited by Yudhishthira Mimamsaka. Ajmer, 2024 Saṃvat. Āpiśaliśikṣā, edited by Raghu Vira. 1934. In The Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol.I, No. 2. APR = Atharvaprātiśākhya (edited by Suryakanta).

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 690 Apte, V.M. 1940-41. “Non-R̥gvedic Mantras rubricate in the Āśvalāyana- gr̥hya-sūtra: Sources and Interpretation.” In New Indian Antiquary. Vol. III, Nos. 2-7. Aṣṭādaśa Upaniṣadaḥ. Edited by V.P. Limaye and R.D. Wadekar. 1958. Pune: Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa. Āśvalāyanagr̥hyasūta. Edited by Adolf Friedrich Stenzler. Leipzig, 1864. Āśvalāyanaśrautasūtra. Edited by Ramanarayana Vidyaratna. Bibliotheca Indica. Calcutta, 1874. Ātharvaṇapariśiṣṭam. See: Śikṣāsaṃgraha, pp. 479-480. Atharvapariśiṣṭāni. Ed. by Ram Kumar Rai. 1976. Banaras: Chowkhamba Orientalia. Atharvapariśiṣṭas. See: Bolling and Negelein (1910). Atharvaprātiśākhya. (APR) Edited and translated by Surya Kanta, with critical introduction and notes. 1939. Lahore: Mehar Chand Lachhman Das. Reprinted from Delhi in 1968 by Mehar Chand Lachhman Das. Atharvaprātiśākhya, edited by Vishva Bandhu Vidyarthi Shastri. 1923. Lahore: Punjab University. Atharvaveda of the Paippalādas. Edited by Raghu Vira. 1979. Delhi: Arsha Sahitya Prachar Trust. Atharvaveda (Śaunakīya), with Sāyaṇa’s commentary. Edited by S.P. Pandit. Bombay, 1895-98. Atharvaveda (Śaunakīya), with the Padapāṭha and the commentary by Sāyaṇa. Edited by Vishva Bandhu. In five parts. Vishveshvarananda Indological Series, Volumes 13-17. 1960-1964. Atharvavedasaṃhitā (Śaunakīya). Edited by R. Roth and W.D. Whitney. 1856. Berlin: Ferd. DÜmmler’s Verlagsbuchhandlung. AV = Atharvaveda. Bare, James. 1980. Phonetics and Phonology in Pāṇini, The System of Fea- tures implicit in the Aṣṭādhyāyī. Natural Language Studies, No. 21. Ann Arbor: Department of Linguistics, The University of Michigan. Basu, Subhra. 1978. “The phenomenon of abhinidhāna and its scope.” In The Proceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 28th Session, Karnataka University, Dharwar, November 1976, pp. 443-450. Pune: All-India Oriental Conference, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Baudhāyanaśrautasūtra. Edited by W. Caland. Bibliotheca Indica, No. 163, Vols. I-III. 1904, 1907, and 1913. Calcutta: Asiatic Society. Bender, Earnest. 1992. The Sālibhadra-Dhanna-Carita. American Oriental Series, Vol. 73. New Haven: American Oriental Society.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 691 Bhāradvājaśikṣā. Edited and translated into Latin by Aemilius Sieg. 1891. Berlin. Bhāradvājaśikṣā, with Nāgeśvara’s commentary. Edited by V.R. Ramachandra Dikshitar and P.S. Sundaram Ayyar. Government Oriental Series, Class A, No. 6. 1938. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Bhāṣikasūtra, of Kātyāyana, with the commentaries of Mahāsvāmin and Anantabhaṭṭa. Critically edited by Braj Bihari Chaubey. Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvaranand Vishva Bandhu Institute of Sanskrit and Indological Studies, Punjab Univrsity, 1975. Bloomfield, Maurice. 1899. The Atharva Veda. Reprinted by Asian Publi- cation Services in 1978. ———-. 1906. A Vedic Concordance. Harvard Oriental Series, Vol. 10. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Reprinted in Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1964. Böhtlingk, Otto. 1887. Pāṇinis Grammatik. Leipzig: Verlag von H. Haessel. Bolling, George Melville, and Negelein, Julius von. (1910). The Pariśiṣṭas of the Atharvaveda. Vol.I., Part II. Leipzig: Otto Harrassowitz. Br̥hacchabdenduśekhara, by Nāgeśabhaṭṭa, in three volumes. Edited by Sita- ram Sastri. Sarasvatī Bhavana Granthamālā, No. 87. Banaras, 1960. Br̥haddevatā. Edited and translated by Arthur Anthony Macdonell. Harvard Oriental Series, Vols. V and VI, 1904. Reprint edition, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1965. Bright, William. 1958. “A Note on Visarga.” Deccan College Bulletin, XVIII, pp. 271-273. Bronkhorst, Johannes. 1981. “The orthoepic diaskeuasis of the R̥gveda and the date of Pāṇini.” In Indo-Iranian Journal, Vol. 23, pp. 83-95. ———-. 1982. “The R̥gveda-Prātiśākhya and its Śākhā.” In Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Heft 8/9, pp. 77-95. ———-. 1982a. “Some observations on the Padapāṭha of the R̥gveda.” In Indo-Iranian Journal, Vol. 24, pp. 181-89. ———-. 1991. “Pāṇini and the Veda Reconsidered.” In Pāṇinian Studies, Professor S.D. Joshi Felicitation Volume, pp. 75-121. Edited by Madhav M. Deshpande and Saroja Bhate. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan. Burrow, Thomas. 1955. The Sanskrit Language. London: Faber and Faber. CA = Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā, as constituted in this edition. CAB = Caturādhyāyībhāṣya, as constituted in this edition. Cāndravyākaraṇa, by Candragomin, with the Svopajñavr̥tti, in two volumes. Ed. by K.C. Chatterji. 1953, 1961. Pune: Deccan College.

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 692 Cardona, George. 1964. “The Formulation of Pāṇini 7.3.73.” In Journal of the Oriental Institute, Baroda. ———-. 1969. Studies in Indian Grammarians I, the Method of Description Reflected in the Śivasūtras. Transactions of the American Philo- sophical Society, New Series, Vol. 59, Pt. I. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ———-. 1980. “On the Āpiśaliśikṣā.” In A Corpus of Indian Studies, Essays in Honour of Professor Gaurinath Sastri. Pp. 245-256. Cal- cutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar. ———-. 1980-81. “On the Domain of Pāṇini’s Metarule 1.3.10: yathāsaṃkhyam anudeśaḥ samānām.” In Adyar Library Bulletin, Brahmavidyā, Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja Felicitation Volume, Vols. 44-45, pp. 394-409. ———-. 1983. “Phonetics and Phonological Rules in Grammars.” In Lin- guistic Analysis and Some Indian Traditions, pp. 1-36. Pandit Shripad Shastri Deodhar Memorial Lectures. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. ———-. 1983c. “On the Formulation of Aṣṭādhyāyī 8.3.4: anunāsikāt paro ’nusvāraḥ.” In Surabhi, Professor E.R. Sreekrishna Sarma Felicitation Volume, pp. 199-205. Madras. ———-. 1986. “Phonology and Phonetics in Ancient Indian Works: The Case of Voiced and Voiceless Elements.” In South Asian Languages, Structure, Convergence and Diaglossia. Edited by Bh. Krishnamurti, Colin P. Masica and Anjani K. Sinha. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ———-. 1987. “Some Neglected Evidence Concerning the Development of Abhinihita Sandhi.” In Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik, Festschrift Wilhelm Rau, Vols. 13-14, pp. 59-68. ———-. 1991. “On Pāṇini, Śākalya, Vedic Dialects and Vedic Exegetical Traditions.” In Pāṇinian Studies, Professor S.D. Joshi Felicitation Volume, pp. 123-134. Edited by Madhav M. Deshpande and Saroja Bhate. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan. ———-. Forthcoming. “Āmreḍita compounds?” Professor Paul Thieme Festschrift. Chandra, Lokesh. 1981. (Ed.) Sanskrit Texts on Phonetics: A Collection of Śikṣā Texts. Śatapiṭaka Series, Vol. 282. Delhi: International Acad- emy of Indian Culture.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 693 Chatterji, K.C. 1948, 1964. Technical Terms and Technique of Sanskrit Grammar, University of Calcutta, Calcutta, 1948. Revised edition by Gaurinath Shastri, Calcutta, 1964. Chaubey, B.B. 1976. “Authenticity of the Bhāṣika Sūtra.” In The Proceed- ings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 27th Session, Kurukṣetra University, Kurukṣetra, pp. 215-226. 1976. Pune: All-India Oriental Conference, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Citrācārya, Jagadīśa. 1969. Śikṣāśāstram (in Sanskrit). Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh, India: Bālārka Veda Mandira. Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi, the fourth Lakṣaṇa treatise of the Atharvaveda. Edited by Ramagopala Sastri. Dayananda Mahavidyalaya Sanskrit Series, No. 4. Lahore, 1921. DelbrÜck, Berthold. 1888. Altindische Syntax, Syntactische Forschungen. Vol. V. Halle: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses. Deshpande, Madhav M. 1972. “Pāṇinian Procedure of Taparakaraṇa: A Histoical Investigation.” In Zeitschrift fÜr vergleichende Sprachfor- schung, Band 86, Heft 2, Göttingen, pp. 207-254. ———-. 1975. Critical Studies in Indian Grammarians I: The Theory of Homogeneity [Sāvarṇya]. The Michigan Series in South and Southeast Asian Languages and Linguistics, No. 2. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan. ———-. 1975a. “Phonetics of V in Pāṇini.” In Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, vol. 56, pp. 45-65. ———-. 1975b. “Phonetics of Short A in Sanskrit.” In Indo-Iranian Journal 17, pp. 195-209. ———-. 1976. “On the R̥kprātiśākhya 13.5-6.” In Indian Linguistics 37, pp. 171-181. ———-. 1976a. “New Material on the Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa.” In Journal of the Oriental Institute, Vol. XXVI, No. 2, pp. 131-144. ———-. 1978. “Pāṇinian Grammarians on Dialectal Variation.” In Adyar Library Bulletin, Brahmavidyā, Vol. 42, pp. 61-114. ———-. 1979. “Genesis of R̥gvedic Retroflexion: A Historical and Socio- linguistic Investigation.” In Aryan and Non-Aryan in India. Michigan Papers on South and Southeast Asia, 14. Ed. by Madhav M. Deshpande and Peter E. Hook. Pp. 235-315. Ann Arbor: Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, The University of Michigan. ———-. 1979a. Sociolinguistic Attitudes in India: An Historical Recon- struction. Linguistica Extrania, Studia 5. Ann Arbor: Karoma Pub- lishers, Inc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 694 ———-. 1980-81. “Announcing a critical edition of the Śaunakīyā Catura- dhyāyikā (alias Whitney’s Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya).” In Adyar Library Bulletin, Brahmavidyā, Vols. 44-45, Dr. K. Kunjunni Raja Felicitation Volume, pp. 241-252. ———-. 1981. “Revisiting Pāṇini 7.3.73.” In Indian Linguistics, Vol. 42, Nos. 1-4, pp. 58-64. ———-. 1982. “Linguistic Presuppositions of Pāṇini 8.3.26-27.” In The Proceedings of the International Seminar on Pāṇini, pp. 23-42. Pune: Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Poona. ———-. 1983. “Pāṇini as a Frontier Grammarian.” In CLS 19, Papers from the 19nth Regional Meeting, pp. 110-116. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. ———-. 1985. Ellipsis and Syntactic Overlapping: Current Issues in Pāṇinian Syntactic Theory. Pandit Shripad Shastri Deodhar Memorial Lectures, Second Series. Post-graduate and Research Department Series No. 24. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. ———-. 1992. The Meaning of Nouns, Semantic Theory in Classical and Medieval India. Nāmārtha-nirṇaya of Kauṇḍabhaṭṭa, translated and annotated. Studies of Classical India 13. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. ———-. 1993. Sanskrit and Prakrit: Sociolinguistic Issues. MLBD Series in Linguistics, Vol. 6. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. ———-. 1994. “Grammars and Grammar-Switching in Vedic Recitational Variations.” Brahmavidyā, the Adyar Library Bulletin, Volume 58, pp. 41-63. ———-. 1994a. “Ancient Indian Phonetics.” In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, (Volume 6) History of Linguistics, edited by Ronald E. Asher. Pp. 3053-3058. Oxford: Pergamon Press. ———-. 1994b. “Prācīn Bhāratīya Dhvaniśāstra” (In Marāṭhī). In Vācaspatyam, Pt. Vaman Shastri Bhagawat Felicitation Volume. Ed. by Saroja Bhate and Madhav Deshpande. Pp. 57-69. Pune: Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa. ———-. Forthcoming. “Pāṇini and the Distinctive Features.” In Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute, Sir William Jones’ Bicentenary of Death Commemoration Volume, 1996 (?), Pune. ———-. Forthcoming. “The AV Prātiśākhyas and the Transmission of the ŚAV.” In the Proceedings of the First International Conference on

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 695 Vedas, held in New York in July 1993, International Foundation for Vedic Education, Rahway, New Jersey. ———-. Forthcoming. “The Notion of Distinctive Features in Sanskrit Phonetics.” In Dr. U.P. Shah Commemoration Volume, Baroda. Devasthali, G.V. 1978. “Vedic Section, Presidential Address.” In Proceed- ings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 28th Session, Karnataka University, Dharwar, November 1976, pp. 9-18. Pune: All-India Ori- ental Conference, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Emeneau, M.B. 1946. “The Nasal Phonemes of Sanskrit.” In Language, Vol. XXII, pp. 86-93. Fry, A.H. 1941. “A phonemic interpretation of visarga.” In Language, XVII, pp. 194-200. Ghatage, A.M. 1941. Introduction to Ardhamāgadhī. Kolhapur. Ghosh, Manmohan. 1938. Pāṇinīya-śikṣā, critically edited in all its five re- censions. With introduction, translation and notes. Calcutta: Univer- sity of Calcutta. Gobhilagr̥hyasūtra. Edited by Friedrich Knauer. 1884. Leipzig. Gonda, Jan. 1971. Old Indian. (= Handbuch der Orientalistik, Zweite Ab- teilung, Indien, Erster Band, Die Indischen Sprachen, Erster Abschnitt, Old Indian). Leiden: E.J. Brill. Gopathabrāhmaṇa. Edited by Vijayapal Vidyavaridhi. 1980. Calcutta: Savitri Devi Bagadiya Trust. Heffner, R-M. S. 1952. General Phonetics. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. HinÜber, Oskar v. 1981. “Die Paiśācī und die Entstehung der Sakischen Orthographie.” In Studien zum Jainismus und Buddhismus : Gedank- schrift fÜr Ludwig Alsdorf, edited by Klaus Bruhn and Albrecht Wezler. Alt- und Neu- Indische Studien 23. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. ———-. 1989. Der Beginn der Schrift und frÜhe Schriftlichkeit in Indien. Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur, Mainz. Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, Jahrgang 1989, Nr. 11. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden. Hock, H.H. 1992. “Were r̥ and l̥ Velar in Early Sanskrit.” In Vidyāvratin, Professor A.M. Ghatage Felicitation Volume, pp. 69-94. Edited by V.N. Jha. Delhi: Sri Satguru Publiations. Howard, Wayne. 1977. Sāmavedic Chant. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. ———-. 1986. Veda Recitation in Vārāṇasī. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 696 Hueckstedt, Robert A. 1995. Nearness and Respective Correlation: A History of the Interpretation of Aṣṭādhyāyī 6.1.77: iko yaṇ aci. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Jha, V.N. 1987. The Studies in the Padapāṭha and Vedic Philology. Delhi: Pratibha Prakashan. Jaiminīyabrāhmaṇa. Edited by Raghu Vira and Lokesh Chandra. Sarasvati Vihar Series. 1954. Nagpur. Jog, K.P. 1978. “Mādhava on some aspect of the Padapāṭha as a means of R̥gvedic interpretation.” In Proceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 28th Session, Karnataka University, Dharwar, November 1976, pp. 227-231. Pune: All-India Oriental Conference, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Joshi, S.D. 1967. The Sphoṭanirṇaya of Kauṇḍabhaṭṭa. Edited with intro- duction, translation, and critical and exegetical notes. Pune: Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Poona. ———-. 1968. Patañjali’s Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya, Samarthāhnika. Edited and translated with Explanatory Notes by S.D. Joshi. Publications of the Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Class C, No. 3. Pune: University of Poona. Kāśikāvr̥tti (KV), by Vāmana-Jayāditya, with the commentary Nyāsa by Jinendrabuddhi and Padamañjarī by Haradatta. Ed. by Dwarikadas Shastri and Kalika Prasad Shukla. In six volumes. Prācya Bhāratī Series 2. 1965-7. Banaras: Tara Publications. Kātantrarūpamālāvyākaraṇa, by Bhāvasena Traividyadeva. Edited by Jivaram Shastri Rayakawal. 1895. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagara Press. Kātantravyākaraṇa, by Śarvavarman, with the commentary of Durgasiṃha. Ed. by J. Eggeling. Bibliotheca Indica. Calcutta, 1874-8. Kāṭhakasaṃhitā. Edited by Leopold v. Schroeder. Four volumes. Leipzig, 1900. Katre, S.L. 1938. “Kautsa-Vyākaraṇa: A Detailed Notice; Recovery of Kautsa’s authorship.” In New Indian Antiquary I, Bombay. Katre, S.M. 1987. Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. Austin: University of Texas Press. Kauhalīśikṣā, edited by Sadhu Ram. In Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol. 2, No. 1, April 1935, pp. 1-9. Kielhorn, Franz. 1876. “Remarks of the Śikṣās.” In The Indian Antiquary, Vol. 5. Bombay. Kiparsky, Paul. 1979. Pāṇini as a Variationist. Jointly published by the MIT Press, Cambridge, and Universiy of Poona, Pune.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 697 ———-. 1982. Some Theoretical Problems in Pāṇini’s Grammar. Professor K.V. Abhyankar Memorial Lectures, Post Graduate and Research Department Series No. 16. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research In- stitute. Kṣīrataraṅgiṇī, by Kṣīrasvāmin, a commentary on Pāṇini’s Dhātupāṭha. Edited by Yudhishthira Mimamsaka. Saṃvat 2014. Amritsar: Ramlal Kapoor Trust. KV = Kāśikāvr̥tti. Ladefoged, Peter. 1971. Preliminaries to Linguistic Phonetics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ———-. 1973. “The Features of the Larynx.” In Journal of Phonetics, vol.I, pp. 73-83. Laghur̥ktantrasaṃgraha, and Sāmasaptalakṣaṇa. Edited by Surya Kanta. Originally published in 1940. Reprinted in 1982 by Meherchand Lachmandas. Delhi. Laghuśabdenduśekhara, by Nāgeśabhaṭṭa, with six commentaries. Ed. by Guru Prasad Shastri. Rājasthan Sanskrit College Series 14. 1936. Banaras. Laghusiddhāntakaumudī, of Varadarāja. Edited by Ramchandra Bhikudev Gunjikar and Lakshman Vasudev Panshikar. 12th Reprint. 1933. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagara Press. LÜders, Heinrich. 1894. Die Vyāsa-Śikṣā, besonders in ihrem Verhältnis zum Taittirīya-Prātiśākhya. Göttingen. Macdonell, A.A. 1916. A Vedic Grammar for Students. Oxford University Press, reprinted in 1971. Mahābhāṣya, or Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya (MB), by Patañjali, with the com- mentaries Pradīpa by Kaiyaṭa and Uddyota by Nāgeśabhaṭṭa. In three volumes. 1967. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Mahābhāṣya, or Vyākaraṇa-Mahābhāṣya, by Patañjali. Edited by F. Kielhorn. Revised edition by K.V. Abhyankar. Vol. I, 1962; vol. II, 1965; vol. III, 1972. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Mahulkar, D.D. 1981. The Prātiśākhya Tradition and Modern Linguistics. Baroda: M.S. University of Baroda, Department of Linguistics. Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā. Edited by Leopold v. Schröder. Two volumes in four parts. Leipzig, 1881, 1886. Māṇḍūkīśikṣā. See: Śikṣāsaṃgraha, pp. 463-478. Māṇḍūkīśikṣā, edited by Bhagavaddatta. 1921. Dayananda Mahavidyalaya Sanskrit Series, No. 5. Lahore: The Research Department, D.A.V College.

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 698 Mantrabrāhmaṇa. Edited by Satyavrat Samasrami. Calcutta, 1947. Mātrālakṣaṇa. Edited by Wayne Howard. Kalāmūlaśāstra Series, No. 1. 1988. Delhi: Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts & Motilal Banarsidass. Mayank, Manjul. 1990. “Pāṇini’s acquaintance with the Atharvaveda.” In Pāṇini and the Veda, pp. 32-45. Edited by Madhav M. Deshpande. Leiden: E.J. Brill. MB = Mahābhāṣya. Mehendale, M.A. 1963. “Upaniṣadic Etymology.” In Munshi Felicitation Volume. Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. Meillet, Antoine. 1913. “La prononciation de e en védique.” MSL, 18, 377. Mimamsaka, Yudhishthira. 1958. Vaidika-Svara-Mīmāṃsā. Amritsar: Ramlal Kapoor Trust. Mishra, R.C. 1984. “The Extant AV Śākhās and their Area of Circulation.” In The Proceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 31st Session, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, October 1982, pp. 207-214. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Modak, B.R. 1993. The Ancillary Literature of the Atharva-Veda : A Study with Special Reference to the Pariśiṣṭas. New Delhi: Rashtriya Veda Vidya Pratishthan in association with Munshiram Manoharlal. MS = Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā. Mugdhabodhavyākaraṇa, by Bopadeva, with commentaries by Durgādāsa Vidyāvāgīśa and Śrīrāma Tarkavāgīśa. Edited by Jībānanda Vidya- sagara. 1902. Calcutta. Nāradīyaśikṣā, with the commentary of Bhaṭṭa Śobhākara. Edited with Translation and Explanatory Notes in English by Usha R. Bhise. Re- search Unit Series No. 8. 1986. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Nirukta. By Yāska, with the commentary by Durgācārya. Edited by V.K. Rajwade. Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series, Vol. 88, Pts. I-II. Pune, 1921, 1926. Nirukta, with the commentary of Skanda Maheśvara. Edited by Lakshman Sarup. Originally published in three volumes in 1928, 1931, and 1934. Reprinted in two volumes in 1982 by Meherchand Lachhmandas. Delhi. NR = Nirukta. Nyāsa on Kāśikāvr̥tti, see: Kāśikāvr̥tti.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 699 Oldenberg, Hermann. 1890, 1962. Ancient India, Its Language and Religions. Originally published in Deutsche Randschau, Berlin, 1890; Indian English Edition, 1962, Calcutta: Punthi Pustak. ———-. 1905, 1973. Vedic Research. Originally published in 1905. Translated into English by V.G. Paranjpe. 1973. Pune: Āryasaṃskr̥ti Prakāśana. P = Pāṇinisūtra. Pandeya, Ramagya. 1965. Vyākaraṇadarśanapīṭhikā. Sarasvatī Bhavana Adhyanamālā 12. Banaras: Sampurnananda Sanskrit Vishvavidya- laya. Pandeya, Vijay Shankar. 1987. Vaidika Dhvani Vigyāna. Allahabad: Akshayavat Prakashan. Pāraskaragr̥hyasūtra. With five commentaries. Edited by Mahadev Gangadhar Bakre. 1917. Bombay: The Gujarati Printing Press. Paribhāṣenduśekhara, by Nāgeśabhaṭṭa, with the commentary Tattvādarśa by M. Vāsudeva Shastri Abhyankar. Ed. bAbhyankar. Revised edition, 1962. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. PAV = Paippalāda Atharvaveda. Pertsch, Guilelmus. 1854. Upalekha: De Kramapāṭha Libellus. Sanskrit text, edited and translated into Latin, with annotations. Berlin. Phatak, Madhukar. 1972. Pāṇinīyaśikṣāyāḥ śikṣāntaraiḥ saha samīkṣā. Banaras. Phiṭsūtras, of Śāntanava. Edited with Introduction, Translation, and Critical and Exegetical Notes by G.V. Devasthali. Publications of the Centre of Advanced Study in Snskrit, Class C, No. 1. 1967. Pune: University of Poona. Pike, Kenneth L. 1943. Phonetics. 12th Printing in 1969. Ann Arbor: Uni- versity of Michigan Press. Pischel, Richard, and Geldner, Karl F. 1892,1897, 1901. Vedische Studien. In three parts. Stuttgart: Druck und verlag von W. Kohlhammer. Prakriyākaumudī, by Rāmacandra, with Prasāda commentary by Viṭṭhala. Edited by K.P. Trivedi. Bombay Sanskrit and Prakrit Series, LXXVII (Pt. I) and LXXXII (Pt. II), 1925 and 1931. Bombay. Prakriyākaumudī, with the commentary Prakāśa by Śrīkr̥ṣṇa. Edited by Muralidhara Miśra. Sarasvatī Bhavana Granthamālā, Vol. 112. In 3 Parts. Banaras: Sampurnanda Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya. 1977-1980. Prātiśākhyapradīpaśikṣā. See: Śikṣāsaṃgraha, pp. 210-326. Prauḍhamanoramā, by Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita, with the commentaries Br̥hacchab- daratna by Hari Dīkṣita and Laghuśabdaratna by Nāgeśabhaṭṭa, upto the

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 700 Avyayībhāva section. Edited by Sitaram Shastri. Nepal Rajya Hindu Viśvavidyālaya Series 3. 1964. Banaras. Rai, Ganga Sagar. 1972. “Śākhās of the AV.” In Purāṇa, Vol. XIV. Rastogi, M.L. 1957. “Śaunaka and the abhinihita sandhi in the R̥gveda.” In Indian Linguistics, Bagchi Memorial Volume, pp. 21-29. Renou, Louis. 1942. Terminologie Grammaticale du Sanskrit. Paris. R̥gvarṇakramalakṣaṇa, of Narasiṃhasūri. Edited by V. Krishnamacharya. 1959. Madras: Adyar Library and Research Centre. R̥gvedānukramaṇī, of Mādhavabhaṭṭa. Edited by C. Kunhan Raja. Madras University Sanskrit Series, No. 2. Madras: University of Madras, 1932. R̥gvedaprātiśākhya. (RPR) Edited by Mangal Deva Shastri. Vol. I, Critical text of RPR, 1959, Vaidika Svadhyaya Mandira, Banaras; Vol. II, RPR with Uvaṭa’s commentary, 1931, The Indian Press, Allahabad; Vol. III, RPR in English translation, Punjab Oriental Series, No 24, 1937, Lahore. R̥gvedaprātiśākhya. Edited and translated into German by Max MÜller. 1869. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus. R̥gvedaprātiśākhya. Études sur la Grammaire Védique. With a French translation and notes by M. Reinaud. 1856-1858. Journal Asiatique, Serie 5. Vols. VII-XII R̥gvedasaṃhitā, with Sāyaṇa’s commentary. Edited by N.S. Sonatakke and C.G. Kashikar. Five volumes. 1933-1951. Pune: Vaidika Saṃśo- dhana Maṇḍaḷ. R̥ktantra, ascribed to Śākaṭāyana. Ed. by Surya Kanta. 1939. Lahore. Reprinted by Meherchand Lachhmandas, Delhi, 1971. R̥ṅmantrāṇāṃ Ghanapāṭhaḥ. Edited by V.R. Antarkar. 1984. Bombay: V.R. Antarkar. Roth, Rudolph. 1846. Zur Literatur und Geschichte des Weda. Stutgart: A. Liesching & Comp. RPR = R̥gvedaprātiśākhya. RV = R̥gveda. Śabdakalpadruma, of Raja Radha Kanta Deva. In 5 volumes. Originally published from Calcutta, Śaka 1808. Reprinted as Chowkhamba San- skrit Series, No. 93. 1967. Banaras: The Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office. Śabdakaustubha, by Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita. Ed. by Nene and Puntamkar. Chow- khamba Sanskrit Series 2, Vol. I, fasc. 1-5. 1933. Banaras. Ṣaḍviṃśabrāhmaṇa. Edited by H.E. Eelsingh. 1908. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 701 Śaisirīyaśikṣā, ed. by Tarapada Chowdhury. InThe Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol. 2, No. 2, August 1935, pp. 1-18. Śamānalakṣaṇam Upalekhasūtraṃ ca. Edited by K.S. Venkataram Sastri. 1967. Srirangam: Vani Vilas Press. Śāṃkhāyana Āraṇyaka. See Aitareya-Āraṇyaka. Sārasvatavyākaraṇa, by Anubhūtisvarūpācārya. Ed. by Narayana Rama Acharya. 7th edition. 1952. Bombay: Nirnaya Sagara Press. Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa, by Bhojadeva, with the commentary Hr̥dayahāriṇī by Nārāyaṇa Daṇḍanātha. Pt. I., Trivandrum Sanskrit Series CXVII, 1935. Trivandrum. Sarma, V. Venkatarama. 1935. Critical Studies on Kātyāyana’s Śukla- yajurvedaprātiśākhya. Madras: University of Madras. Sārthapiṅgalachandaḥsūtra. Edited and translated into Marathi by Shivaram Shastri Shintre. Vedāṅgārthacandrikā, Part 3. 1935. Bombay. Sarvasammata-Śikṣā. Edited and translated into German by A. Otto Franke. 1886. Göttingen: Dieterichschen Univ.-Buchdrucherei. Śatapathabrāhmaṇa. Edited by Albrecht Weber. Berlin, 1849. Reprinted in Banaras: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series, vol. 96, 1964. Śaunakaśikṣā. Edited by K.N.M. Divakara Dvijendra. Tripunithura, 1962. ŚAV = Śaunakīya Atharvaveda. ŚB = Śatapathabrāhmaṇa. Sharma, K.L. 1974. “Prātiśākhyas and the Padapāṭha (The Problem of Ava- graha).” In Charudeva Shastri Fel. Volume, pp. 133-148. Delhi. Shastri, M.D. 1926. A Comparison of the Contents of the R̥gveda, Vājasaneyi, Taittirīya and Atharva-Prātiśākhyas. Princess of Wales Sarasvati Bhavana Studies, Vol. 5. Banaras. Siddhāntakaumudī (SK), by Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita, with the commentary Tattvabodhinī by Jñānendra Sarasvatī. Edited by Śivadatta. 1959. Bombay: Venkateshvar Steam Press. Śikṣāsaṃgraha. edited and annotated by Pandit Yugalkishor Vyas. 1893. Banaras Sanskrit Series. Banaras. Śikṣāsūtrāṇi, Āpiśali-Pāṇini-Candragomi-viracitāni. Edited by Yudhishthira Mimamsaka. Saṃvat 2024. Ajmer: Bharatiya Prachyavidya Prati- shthan. SK = Siddhāntakaumudī. Stautzebach, Ralf. 1994. Pāriśikṣā und Sarvasammataśikṣā: Rechtlaut-lehren der Taittirīya-śākhā. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag. Strunk, Klaus. 1983. Typische merkmale von Fragesätzen und die alt- indische Pluti. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse Sitzungsberichte,

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 702 Jahrgang 1983, Heft 8. MÜnchen: Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Śulkayajurvedīyakāṇvasaṃhitā. Edited by S.D. Satavlekar. Śaka-Saṃvat 1862. Aundh: Svādhyāya Maṇḍal. Suryakanta. 1981. A Practical Vedic Dictionary. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Svaramañjarī, of Srīnarasiṃhasūri. Edited by G.V. Devasthali. Research Unit Series, No. 6. 1985. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Series. Svarasiddhāntacandrika, of Śrīnivāsayajvan. Edited by K.A. Shivarama- krishna Shastri. 1936. Annamalainagar: Annamalai University. TA = Taittirīya Āraṇyaka. Taittirīya Āraṇyaka (TA). Ānandāśrama Sanskrit Series, No. 36, Pts. I-II. 1867-69. Pune: Ānandāśrama. Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa. Edited by Rajendralal Mitra. Three volumes in Bibliotheca Indica. Calcutta, 1855-1870. Taittirīyaprātiśākhya, with the commentary Tribhāṣyaratna. Edited and translated by W.D. Whitney. New Haven, 1868. Taittirīyaprātiśākhya, with the commentaries Tribhāṣyaratna and Vaidikābharaṇa. Edited by K. Rangacharya and R. Shama Sastri. Government Oriental Library Series, Bibliotheca Sanskrita, No. 33. Mysore, 1906. Taittirīyaprātiśākhya, with the commentary Padakramasadana by Māhiṣeya. Edited by V. Venkatarama Sharma. Madras University Sanskrit Series, No. 1. 1930. Madras: University of Madras. Taittirīyasaṃhitā. Edited by Albrecht Weber. Two volumes, Indische Studien XI and XII. Leipzig, 1871-1872. Taittirīyasaṃhitā. Edited by Anant Yajñeśvar Dhupkar. 1957. Aundh: Svādhyāya Maṇḍal. Taittirīyasaṃhitā, with the commentaries of Bhaṭṭabhāskara and Sāyaṇa. Edited by N.S. Sontakke and T.N. Dharmadhikari. Vol.I, Pts. I-II. 1970, 1972. Pune: Vaidika Saṃśodhana Maṇḍaḷa. TB = Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa. Thieme, Paul. 1935. Pāṇini and the Veda. Globe Press. Allahabad. ———-. 1937. “Pāṇini and the R̥kprātiśākhya.” In Indian HIstorical Quarterly, Vol. 13, pp. 329-343. ———-. 1937-38. “On the Identity of the Vārttikakāra.” In Indian Culture, Vol. IV, No. 2, pp. 189-209.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 703 ———-. 1985. “The first verse of the Triṣaptīyam (AV, Ś 1.1 ! AV, P 1.6) and the beginnings of Sanskrit linguistics.” In Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 559-565. TPR = Taittirīyaprātiśākhya. Tripathi, Ramdev. 1977. Bhāṣāvigyān kī Bhāratīya Paramparā aur Pāṇini. Patna: Bihar Rashtrabhasha Parishad. TS = Taittirīyasaṃhitā. Turner, R.L. 1960. Some Problems of Sound Change in Indo-Aryan. Pro- fessor P.D. Gune Memorial Lectures 1. Pune: University of Poona. Uhlenbeck, C.C. 1898. A Manual of Sanskrit Phonetics. Amsterdam. Re- printed in 1960. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Unithiri, N.V.P. 1987. “Padapradīpikā - A newly discovered treatise on the Padapāṭha of the Kr̥ṣṇayajurveda-Taittirīya-Saṃhitā.” In The Pro- ceedings of the All-India Oriental Conference, 32nd Session, Univer- sity of Gujarat, Ahmedabad, November 1985, pp. 197-202. Pune: All- India Oriental Conference, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. Upalekhasūtra. See K.V. Abhyankar, 1974. Vadegaonkar, N.D. 1945-1964. Marathi translation of Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita’s Prauḍhamanoramā, with the commentary Śabdaratna, in 7 parts. Nagpur. Vaidikapadānukramakośa. Vols. 1-15a. Edited by Vishva Bandhu. 1942- 1965. Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvaranand Vedic Research Institute (= VVRI). Vājasaneyiprātiśākhya, with commentaries by Uvaṭa and Anantabhaṭṭa. University of Madras Sanskrit Series 5. Madras, 1934. Vājasaneyisaṃhitā, (VS). Edited by Albrecht Weber. 1852. Berlin. Vājasaneyisaṃhitā (Mādhyandina). Edited by S.D. Satavlekar. Saṃvat 1984. Aundh: Svādhyāya Maṇḍal. Varma, Siddheshwar. 1929. The Phonetic Observations of Indian Gram- marians. London 1929. Indian reprint edition, Delhi, 1961. ———-. 1953. The Etymologies of Yāska. Vishveshvaranand Indological Series - 5. Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvarananda Vedic Research Institute. Varma, Virendra Kumar. 1972. R̥gveda-Prātiśākhya: Ek Pariśīlan. Banaras Hindu University Sanskrit Series, Vol. VII. Banaras: Banaras Hindu University. Varṇapaṭala. See: Bolling and Negelein (1910). Vedavikr̥tilakṣaṇasaṃgraha, a collection of twelve tracts on Vedavikr̥tis and allied topics, edited by K.V. Abhyankar and G.V. Devasthali. 1978.

BIBLIOGRAPHY & ABBREVIATIONS 704 Research Unit Publications, No. 5. Pune: Bhandarkar Oriental Re- search Institute. Veer, Yajan. 1979. The Language of the Atharvaveda. Delhi: Inter-India Publications. Vishva Bandhu. 1923. See: Atharva-Prātiśākhya, edited by Vishva Bandhu Shastri. ———-. 1963. A Grammatical Word-Index to Atharvaveda (both recen- sions). Hoshiarpur: Vishveshvaranand Vedic Research Institute. von Nooten, B.A. 1973. “The Structure of a Sanskrit Phonetic Treatise.” In Oriental Studies, Acta et Commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis, Vol. II, No. 2, pp. 408-436. Tartu. VPR = Vājasaneyiprātiśākhya. VS = Vājasaneyisaṃhitā. Vyāsaśikṣā, ed. by V. Venkataram Sarma. 1929. Madras: University of Madras. Vyāsaśikṣā, with the commentary Vedataijasa. Edited by P.N. Pattabhirama Sastri. 1976. Banaras: Veda Mīmāṃsā Research Centre. Wackernagel, J. and Debrunner, A. 1896-1954. Altindische Grammatik, Vols. I-III. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht. Walleser, Max. 1927. “Zur Aussprache von skr. a.” Zeitschrift fÜr Indologie und Iranistik, Band 5. Leipzig. Weber, Albrecht. 1873. “über den Padapāṭha der Taittirīya-Saṃhitā.” In Indische Studien, Vol. 13, pp. 1-128. Leipzig: F.A. Brockhaus. Whitney, W.D. 1856. “Contributions from the Atharvaveda to the theory of Sanskrit Verbal Accent.” In Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. V, pp. 1-33. ———-. 1862. Atharvaveda-Prātiśākhya or Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā, ed. and translated with notes. In Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 7. New Haven: American Oriental Society. ———-. 1871. “On the nature of designation of the accent in Sanskrit.” In Transactions of the American Philological Association for 1869-70, pp. 20-45. ———-. 1880. “Collation of the Second Mss. of the Atharvaveda Prātiśākhya.” In Journal of the American Oriental Society. Vol. 10, pp. 156-171. ———-. 1881. Index Verborum to the Published Text of the Atharva-Veda. In Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. XII. New Haven: American Oriental Society.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ 705 ———-. 1884. “On Lepsius’s Standard Alphabet: A Letter of Explanation from Prof. Lepsius with Notes by Whitney.” In Journal of the Ameri- can Oriental Society, Vol. 8. ———-. 1889. Sanskrit Grammar. 9th issue (1960) of the second edition (1889). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ———-. 1893. “The Veda in Pāṇini.” In Giornale della Società Asiatica Italiana, Vol. 7, pp. 243-54. ———-. 1905. Atharvaveda Saṃhitā, translated, with a critical and exegetical commentary. Revised and brought nearer to completion and edited by Charles Rockwell Lanman. Harvard Oriental Series, Vols. VII and VIII. Witzel, Michael. 1974 (distributed, Feb. 1975). “On some unknown systems of marking the Vedic accents.” Vishveshvaranand Indological Journal, XII, pp. 472-502. ———-. 1989. “Tracing the Vedic dialects.” In Dialectes dans les littératures indo-aryennes. Edited by Colette Caillat. Publications de l’Institut de Civilasation Indienne, Fasc. 55, pp. 97-265. Paris: Institut de Civilisation Indienne. Yājñavalkyaśikṣā, with the commentary Śikṣāvallī. Edited by Amarnath Shastri. 1962. Banaras: Dīkṣita Kr̥ṣṇacandra Śarmā. Yogopaniṣadaḥ. Adyar Library Series, Vol. 6. 1920. Madras: Adyar Library. _____________________________

Alphabetical Index of the Sūtras of the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā [including Sūtras in the PS not found in the CA] अᳲकᳲपौ जिह्वामूलीयोपध्मानीयौ, PS: 73; not found in CA. अकारस्याभ्यासस्य बहुलम्, CA: 3.1.13; Whitney: 3.13. अकारान्तादह्नः, CA: 3.4.3; Whitney: 3.77. अकारोपधस्योकारोऽकारे, CA: 2.2.14; Whitney: 2.53; PS: 267. अक्षरस्यैषा विधा न विद्यते यद् द्विस्वरीभावः, CA: 3.3.34; Whitney: p. 174. अक्षादूहिन्यां वृद्धिः, PS: 145; not found in CA. अग्नी३त्प्रेषणे, PS: 174; not found in CA. अग्नेः स्तोमसोमयोः, CA: 2.4.16; Whitney: 2.96. अघोषेषु, PS: 243; not found in CA. अघोषेषु च, CA: 2.1.4; Whitney: 2.4; PS: 204. अङ्गयुक्तं तिङाकाङ्क्षम्, PS: 178; not found in CA. अजहातेरहाः, CA: 2.2.7; Whitney: 2.46; PS: 309. अजिनाग्रयोर्विभाषेति नौधात्वोश्चार्धम्, PS: 123; not found in CA. अच्छारमस्तंहस्तलांगूलं…, CA: 4.1.22; Whitney: p. 262. अञ्चतिजरत्पर्वसु, CA: 4.2.7; Whitney: 4.53. अतोऽन्यत्संयुक्तम्, CA: 1.2.9; Whitney: 1.49; PS: 82. अत्र नाम्युपधस्य षकारः, CA: 2.4.1; Whitney: 2.81. अथाङ्गिरसः, CA: 1.1.1; Whitney: not found. अध त्यन्धीः परवर्जम्, CA: 3.1.25; Whitney: 3.25. अधियोगे सप्तम्यर्थे द्वितीया, PS: 155, not found in CA. अधिस्पर्शं च, CA: 1.1.11; Whitney: 1.9; PS: 18, 106. अध्यभिभ्यां स्कन्देः, CA: 2.4.24; Whitney: 2.104.

SŪTRA INDEX 708 अनतौ विसंभ्यां प्राणाख्या चेत्, CA: 4.1.61; Whitney: 4.39. अनर्थककर्मप्रवचनीयान्ययुक्तैर्विग्रहोऽभिवितन्वादिषु, CA: 4.1.25; Whitney: 4.3. अनाख्यातं कृदन्तम्, PS: 86; not found in CA. अनिङ्गेन पूर्वेण, CA: 4.1.34; Whitney: 4.12. अनिश्चये एवे च, PS: 141; not found in CA. अनुदात्तपूर्वात्संयोगाद्यवान्तात्स्वरितं परमपूर्वं वा जात्यः, CA: 3.3.8; Whitney: 3.57. अनुदात्तं प्रश्नान्ताभिपूजितयोः, PS: 182; not found in CA. अनुदात्तेन चोदात्तं सभावो …, CA: 4.1.10; Whitney: p. 261. अनुदात्तो गतिः सर्वैः …, CA: 4.1.18; Whitney: p. 262. अनुदात्तो गतिर्मध्ये …, CA: 4.1.11; Whitney: p. 262. अनुनासिकदीर्घत्वं प्रयोजनम्, CA: 4.4.20; Whitney: 4.119. अनुनासिकस्य च पूर्वेणैकादेशे, CA: 1.3.7; Whitney: 1.69. अनुनासिकं च, CA: 1.2.13; Whitney: 1.53; PS: 42. अनुनासिकः पूर्वश्च शुद्धः, CA: 4.4.22; Whitney: 4.121. अनुनासिकानां मुखनासिकम्, CA: 1.1.27; Whitney: 1.27; PS: 12. अनुनासिकोऽन्तःपदे ह्रस्वः, CA: 1.3.23; Whitney: 1.83; PS: 35, 164. अन्ऌकारः स्वरः पद्यः, CA: 1.1.6; Whitney: 1.4. अनेकोऽनुदात्तेनापि, CA: 4.1.24; Whitney: 4.2. अन्तःपदेऽपि पञ्चपद्याम्, CA: 3.3.10; Whitney: 3.59. अन्तःपुनःप्रातःसनुतःस्वरव्ययानाम्, CA: 2.2.9; Whitney: 2.48; PS: 311. अन्तस्थापत्तावुदात्तस्यानुदात्ते क्षैप्रः, CA: 3.3.9; Whitney: 3.58. अन्तस्थोष्मसु लोपः, CA: 2.1.32; Whitney: 2.32; PS: 228. अन्त्यः स्वरः सोत्तरावयवष्टिः, PS: 69; not found in CA. अन्यस्मन्व्यञ्जने चतुर्थमष्टमं वा, CA: 1.4.11; Whitney: 1.102; PS: 122. अन्येनापि पर्वणा, CA: 4.3.5; Whitney: 4.77. अपसव्याभ्यां च, CA: 2.4.15; Whitney: 2.95.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ709 अभिनिहितः प्राश्लिष्टः …, CA: 3.3.2; Whitney: p. 154. अभिनिहितप्राश्लिष्टजात्यक्षैप्राणाम् …, CA: 3.3.16; Whitney: 3.65. अभिपूजिते, PS: 193; not found in CA. अभि स्याम पृतन्यतः, CA: 2.4.27; Whitney: 2.107. अभ्यासविनतानां च, CA: 4.3.10; Whitney: 4.82. अभ्यासव्यवायेऽपि स्थः, CA: 2.4.13; Whitney: 2.93. अभ्यासस्य परोक्षायाम्, CA: 4.3.12; Whitney: 4.84. अभ्यासाच्च, CA: 2.4.11; Whitney: 2.91. अमी बहुवचनम्, CA: 1.3.16; Whitney: 1.78; PS: 159. अरमृवर्णे, CA: 3.2.23; Whitney: 3.46; PS: 133. अर्धं ह्रस्वस्य पादो दीर्घस्येत्येके, CA: 3.3.32; Whitney: p. 174. अवग्रहादृकारात्, CA: 3.4.16; Whitney: 3.85. अवग्रहे च, CA: 3.3.20; Whitney: 3.69. अवग्रहे च, CA: 3.3.24; Whitney: 3.73. अवग्रहे सविधः, CA: 3.3.15; Whitney: 3.64. अवर्णस्येवर्ण एकारः, CA: 3.2.21; Whitney: 3.44; PS: 130. अवर्णान्तेनैकाक्षरेण प्रतिषिद्धेनाप्रयावादिवर्जम्, CA: 4.2.10; Whitney: 4.56. अवशा आ बभूवाँ ३ इतीतावेकारोऽप्लुतः, CA: 1.4.6; Whitney: 1.97. अवसानं विरामोऽन्तश्च, PS: 67; not found in CA. अविभक्तिकं नाम प्रातिपदिकं च, PS: 84; not found in CA. अव्ययानाम्, CA: 4.2.25; Whitney: 4.71. अव्ययानि च, PS: 306; not found in CA. अशूद्राधिकारे आशिषि, PS: 186; not found in CA. अष्टपदयोगपक्षपर्णदंष्ट्रचक्रेषु, CA: 3.1.2; Whitney: 3.2. असंवृताः स्वरा नामिनः, PS: 55; not found in CA. असिद्धं बहिरङ्गमन्तरङ्गे, PS: 91; not found in CA. अस्मे युष्मे त्वे मे इति चोदात्तः, CA: 1.3.15; Whitney: 1.77; PS: 158. अस्वराणि व्यञ्जनानि, CA: 3.3.26; Whitney: p. 174; PS: 53.

SŪTRA INDEX 710 अहरादीनां पत्यादेर्विभाषा, PS: 305; not found in CA. अहर्नपुंसकम्, CA: 2.2.11; Whitney: 2.50; PS: 313. अहोरात्रे, CA: 4.2.6; Whitney: 4.52. आकारः केवलः प्रथमं पूर्वेण, CA: 3.2.15; Whitney: 3.38; PS: 127. आकारोपधस्य लोपः, CA: 2.2.16; Whitney: 2.55; PS: 269. आकारोपधस्याभिनिष्ठानस्य लोपः, PS: 256; not found in CA. आकारोपधस्योपबद्धादीनां स्वरे, CA: 2.1.27; Whitney: 2.27; PS: 251. आकारौकारादि पुनः, CA: 4.4.16; Whitney: 4.115. आख्यातं यत्क्रियावाचि नाम …, CA: 4.1.2; Whitney: p. 261. आद्यन्तानि टवर्गकवर्गव्यञ्जनानि, PS: 90; not found in CA. आद्युदात्ता दशैतेषामुच्चा …, CA: 4.1.21; Whitney: p. 262. आन्तर्येण वृत्तिः, CA: 1.4.4; Whitney: 1.95. आमन्त्रितं चेतावनार्षे, CA: 1.3.19; Whitney: 1.81; PS: 162. आम्रेडितं भर्त्सने, PS: 177; not found in CA. आयुष्प्रथमे, CA: 2.3.16; Whitney: 2.75; PS: 299. आर्त्नी इवादिष्विवादितिपरः, CA: 1.3.20; Whitney: 1.82; PS: 163. आवःकरकश्च विवरबिभरसर्वनाम्नः, CA: 2.2.5; Whitney: 2.44; PS: 307. आशा दिशि, CA: 4.2.26; Whitney: 4.72. आशिषि, PS: 192; not found in CA. आशीर्बभूवेति प्लुतस्वरस्य सिद्धत्वात्, CA: 4.1.28; Whitney: 4.6. आस्थापितं च, CA: 1.2.8; Whitney: 1.48; PS: 81. इकारयोः प्राश्लिष्टः, CA: 3.3.7; Whitney: 3.56. इङ्ग्यवच्च, CA: 4.3.22; Whitney: no such rule. इङ्ग्यानाम्, CA: 4.3.4; Whitney: 4.76. इच्छायां च यकारादौ, CA: 3.1.18; Whitney: 3.18. इडायास्पदे, CA: 2.3.13; Whitney: 2.72; PS: 296. इतो लोपः, PS: 92, 117; not found in CA. इदमूष्वादिषु त्रिपदत्वात्, CA: 4.3.27; Whitney: 4.98.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ711 इवे च, CA: 4.1.63; Whitney: 4.41. ईऊए द्विवचने प्रगृह्यम्, PS: 74; not found in CA. ईकारोकारौ च सप्तम्यर्थे, CA: 1.3.12; Whitney: 1.74; PS: 154. ईयसश्च, CA: 1.3.27; Whitney: 1.89. ईषत्स्पृष्टमन्तस्थानाम्, CA: 1.1.30; Whitney: 1.30; PS: 21. उकारः परिहार्य एव, CA: 4.4.17; Whitney: 4.116. उकारस्य सर्वत्र, CA: 3.3.11; Whitney: 3.60. उकारस्येतावपृक्तस्य, CA: 1.3.10; Whitney: 1.72; PS: 152. उञ इदमूष्वादिषु, CA: 3.1.4; Whitney: 3.4; PS: 320. उत्तमा अनुनासिकाः, CA: 1.1.13; Whitney: 1.11. उत्तमा उत्तमेषु, CA: 2.1.5; Whitney: 2.5; PS: 202, 205. उत्तररूपं शाङ्खमित्रिः, CA: 3.3.30; Whitney: p. 174. उद हन्तिहरतिस्थास्तम्भिषु, CA: 4.2.16; Whitney: 4.62. उदात्तस्तु निपातो यः …, CA: 4.1.8; Whitney: p. 261. उदात्तादनुदात्तं स्वर्यते, CA: 3.3.18; Whitney: 3.67. उदात्तानुगतिर्यत्रानुदात्तं .., CA: 4.1.12; Whitney: p. 262. उपजाते परेण, CA: 4.1.32; Whitney: 4.10. उपरिष्टाद्बिन्दुरनुस्वारः, PS: 71; not found in CA. उपरिस्विदासी३दिति च, PS: 184; not found in CA. उपर्षन्त्यादिषु च, CA: 3.2.24; Whitney: 3.47. उपसर्ग आख्यातेनोदात्तेन समस्यते, CA: 4.1.23; Whitney: 4.1. उपसर्गस्य धात्वादावारम्, CA: 3.2.25; Whitney: 3.48; PS: 134. उपसर्गस्य नामिनो दस्ति, CA: 3.1.11; Whitney: 3.11. उपसर्गाद्धातोः, CA: 2.4.10; Whitney: 2.90. उपसर्गाद्धातोर्नानापदेऽपि, CA: 3.4.5; Whitney: 3.79. उपसर्गेणावकारे, CA: 4.1.59; Whitney: 4.37. उभयाद् द्युभि, CA: 4.1.43; Whitney: 4.21. उभयोर्लकारे लकारोऽनुनासिकः, CA: 2.1.35; Whitney: 2.35; PS: 233.

SŪTRA INDEX 712 उरु, CA: 3.4.9; Whitney: no such rule. उवर्ण ओकारः, CA: 3.2.22; Whitney: 3.45; PS: 132. उषसो वसूयुबुधयोः, PS: 317; not found in CA. ऊधोऽम्नोभुवसाम्, CA: 2.2.13; Whitney: 2.52; PS: 315. उः पाकारे उपध्मा वा, PS: 246; not found in CA. ऊष्मणां विवृतं च, CA: 1.1.31; Whitney: 1.31; PS: 22. ऊष्मस्वेवान्तःपदे, CA: 2.1.33; Whitney: 2.33; PS: 231. ऋकारान्तात्सदेः, CA: 2.4.19; Whitney: 2.99. ऋगर्धर्चपदान्तावग्रहविवृत्तिषु मात्राकालः कालः, CA: 3.3.35; Whitney: p. 174; PS: 37. ऋणवत्सतरकम्बलवसनदशानामृणे, PS: 135; not found in CA. ऋतवृधवरीवानेषु, CA: 3.1.24; Whitney: 3.24. ऋतूँरुत्सृजते वशीत्येवमादीनाम्, PS: 249, part of CA: 2.1.29; Whitney: 2.29. ऋवर्णरेफषकारेभ्यः समानपदे नो णः, CA: 3.4.1; Whitney: 3.75; PS: 111. ऋवर्णस्य रेफात्परं यत्, CA: 1.3.9; Whitney: 1.71. ऋवर्णे वा, PS: 167; not found in CA. एकमात्रो ह्रस्वः, CA: 1.2.19; Whitney: 1.59; PS: 38. एकाक्षरा उदात्ता आद्युदात्ता …, CA: 4.1.20; Whitney: p. 262; PS: 65. एकादेश उदात्तेनोदात्तः, CA: 3.3.17; Whitney: 3.66. एकादेशस्वरसन्धिदीर्घविनामाः प्रयोजनम्, CA: 4.4.15; Whitney: 4.114. एकामन्त्रिते रोद्विवचनान्तस्य, CA: 2.2.8; Whitney: 2.47; PS: 310. एकारश्च, CA: 1.3.14; Whitney: 1.76; PS: 157. एकारैकारयोरैकारः, CA: 3.2.27; Whitney: 3.50; PS: 138. एकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम्, CA: 1.1.34; Whitney: 1.34; PS: 25. एकारौकारान्तात्पूर्वः पदादेरकारस्य, CA: 3.2.30; Whitney: 3.53; PS: 149 एकारौकारौ पदान्तौ परतोऽकारं सोऽभिनिहितः, CA: 3.3.6; Whitney: 3.55. एकेऽस्पृष्टम्, CA: 1.1.33; Whitney: 1.33; PS: 24.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ713 एना एहा आदयश्च, CA: 3.2.11; Whitney: 3.34. एवमिहेति च, CA: 1.1.3; Whitney: 1.2. एष स व्यञ्जने, CA: 2.2.18; Whitney: 2.57; PS: 271, 322. ओकारान्तश्च, CA: 1.3.18; Whitney: 1.80; PS: 161. ओकारौकारयोरौकारः, CA: 3.2.28; Whitney: 3.51; PS: 143. ओण्योश्च, CA: 3.3.12; Whitney: 3.61. ओत्वोष्ठयोः समासे वा, PS: 147; not found in CA. ओमभ्यादाने, PS: 170; not found in CA. ओमाङोश्च, PS: 148; not found in CA. ओषधेरपञ्चपद्याम्, CA: 3.1.5; Whitney: 3.5. ओष्ठ्यानामधरौष्ठ्यम्, CA: 1.1.25; Whitney: 1.25; PS: 10. ऐकारौकारयोर्विवृततमम्, CA: 1.1.34; Whitney: 1.34. कण्ठ्यानामधरकण्ठ्यः, CA: 1.1.19; Whitney: 1.19; PS: 3. कस्कादीनां पुमो न, PS: 279; not found in CA. काम्याम्रेडितयोः, CA: 4.1.62; Whitney: 4.40. कारे सत्यसहवर्णोः (?), PS: 95; not found in CA. कार्ये प्लुतः, PS: 128; not found in CA. किं सन्धेः स्वरितम्, CA: 3.3.28; Whitney: p. 174. किमक्षरस्य स्वर्यमाणस्य स्वर्यते, CA: 3.3.31; Whitney: p. 174. कुरुकरंकरत्कृणोतुकृतिकृधिष्वकर्णयोः, CA: 2.3.6; Whitney: 2.65; PS: 287. कृत्वे समासो वा नानापददर्शनात्, CA: 4.1.49; Whitney: 4.27. कृपिरुपिरिषीणामनह्वानाम्, CA: 4.3.14; Whitney: 4.86. कृपे रेफस्य लकारः, CA: 1.3.2; Whitney: 1.64. के व्यञ्जनात्, CA: 4.1.47; Whitney: 4.25. केवल उकारः स्वरपूर्वः, CA: 3.2.13; Whitney: 3.36; PS: 277. क्रमाध्ययनं संहितापददार्ढ्यार्थम्, CA: 4.4.9; Whitney: 4.108. क्रमे परेण विगृह्यात्, CA: 4.3.6; Whitney: 4.78. क्रियायोगे गतिः पूर्वः समासो यावन्तो …, CA: 4.1.5; Whitney: p.261.

SŪTRA INDEX 714 क्वचित्प्रकृत्या, CA: 3.2.31; Whitney: 3.54; PS: 268. क्वचिदप्लुतवत्, PS: 194; not found in CA. क्षुभ्नादीनाम्, CA: 3.4.24; Whitney: 3.92. खण्वखा ३ इ खैमखा ३ इत्याकारा …, CA: 1.4.5; Whitney: 1.96. खण्वखा ३ इ खैमखा ३ इ मध्ये तदुरीदं भूया …, CA: 1.4.14; Whitney: 1.105; PS: 189, 190, 195 गविष्टौ गवेषण इति च, CA: 2.1.23; Whitney: 2.23. गुर्वन्यत्, CA: 1.2.12; Whitney: 1.52; PS: 41. गोरगर्धं पूर्णं च स्वहव्ये…, PS: 119; not found in CA. गोसन्यादीनां च, CA: 2.4.23; Whitney: 2.103. घोषवति च, CA: 2.2.4; Whitney: 2.43; PS: 266. घोषवति च, CA: 2.2.14; Whitney: 2.54; PS: 270. घोषवति परे, PS: 257; not found in CA. ङणनानां हकारे, CA: 1.2.7; Whitney: 1.47; PS: 80. ङणना ह्रस्वोपधाः स्वरे, CA: 3.2.2; Whitney: 3.27; PS: 222. ङणनेभ्य ऊष्मसु प्रथमानां द्वितीया वा, PS: 210; not found in CA. ङणनेभ्यः कटतैः शषसेषु, CA: 2.1.9; Whitney: 2.9; PS: 209. चटतवर्गैश्च, CA: 3.4.26; Whitney: 3.94; PS: 113. चटवर्गयोश्च, CA: 2.1.14; Whitney: 2.14; PS: 216. चतुर्णां पदजातानां नामाख्यातोपसर्गनिपातानाम् …, CA: 1.1.2; Whitney: 1.1; PS: 1, 325. चतूरात्रोऽवग्रह एव, CA: 4.3.8; Whitney: 4.80. चवर्गीये घोषवति, CA: 2.1.11; Whitney: 2.11; PS: 213. चिदुपमार्थे, PS: 183; not found in CA. च्यावयतेः कारितान्तस्य, CA: 4.3.19; Whitney: 4.91. छकारस्य, CA: 3.2.4; Whitney: no such rule. PS: 223. जातीयादिषु च, CA: 4.1.50; Whitney: 4.28. जास्पत्यम्, CA: 4.2.18; Whitney: 4.64.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ715 जिह्वामूलीयानां हनुमूलम्, CA: 1.1.20; Whitney: 1.20; PS: 4. जीवन्तीमोषधीम्, CA: 3.1.6; Whitney: 3.6. जीहीडाहम्, CA: 3.1.14; Whitney: 3.14. टकारात्सकारे तकारेण, CA: 2.1.8; Whitney: 2.8; PS: 208. टवर्गीये णकारः, CA: 2.1.12; Whitney: 2.12; PS: 214. तकारस्य शकारलकारयोः परसस्थानः, CA: 2.1.13; Whitney: 2.13; PS: 215. ततस्परौ ब्रह्मपरे, CA: 2.3.7; Whitney: 2.66; PS: 288. ततोऽप्याकारस्य, CA: 1.1.35; Whitney: 1.35; PS: 26. ततो मृदुतरः स्वारः …, CA: 3.3.4; Whitney: p. 154. तत्तानग्रादिषु, CA: 2.4.5; Whitney: 2.85. तदेव स्फोटनः, CA: 1.4.12; Whitney: 1.103; PS: 188. तद्धिते तकारादौ, CA: 2.4.3; Whitney: 2.83. तद्धिते धा, CA: 4.1.35; Whitney: 4.13. तरतमयोः, CA: 4.1.38; Whitney: 4.16. तवर्गीयाच्छकारः शकारस्य, CA: 2.1.17; Whitney: 2.17; PS: 211, 219. तस्य पुनरास्थापितं नाम, CA: 4.4.26; Whitney: 4.125. तस्यान्तेन परस्य प्रसन्धानम्, CA: 4.4.12; Whitney: 4.111. तातिलि, CA: 4.1.42; Whitney: 4.20. ताभ्यां समानपदे तवर्गीयस्य पूर्वसस्थानः, CA: 2.1.15; Whitney: 2.15; PS: 217. तालव्यानां मध्यजिह्वम्, CA: 1.1.21; Whitney: 1.21; PS: 5. तुविष्टमः, CA: 3.4.28; Whitney: 3.96. तृतीयान्तस्य, CA: 3.1.19; Whitney: 3.19. तृतीयासमासे च, PS: 137; not found in CA. तेनैवोपसृष्टेऽपि, CA: 4.1.58; Whitney: 4.36. तेभ्यः पूर्वचतुर्थो हकारस्य, CA: 2.1.7; Whitney: 2.7; PS: 207. तैरोव्यञ्जनपादवृत्तौ …, CA: 3.3.5; Whitney: p. 154. त्राकारान्ते, CA: 4.1.36; Whitney: 4.14.

SŪTRA INDEX 716 त्रिः, CA: 2.3.5; Whitney: 2.64; PS: 286. त्रिमात्रः प्लुतः, CA: 1.2.22; Whitney: 1.62; PS: 49. त्रीणि पदान्यपृक्तमध्यानि, CA: 4.4.14; Whitney: 4.113. त्रेधा, CA: 4.2.20; Whitney: 1.66. त्र्यादिभ्यः, CA: 2.4.18; Whitney: 2.98. त्वे चान्तोदात्ते, CA: 4.1.48; Whitney: 4.26. थानेकाक्षरेण, CA: 4.1.37; Whitney: 4.15. ददातौ तकारादौ, CA: 4.2.15; Whitney: 4.61. दधातौ च हकारादौ, CA: 4.2.17; Whitney: 4.63. दन्त्यानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रस्तीर्णम्, CA: 1.1.24; Whitney: 1.24; PS: 9. दभधीनाशेषु च, PS: 281; not found in CA. दिवस्पदे, PS: 290; not found in CA. दिवस्पृथिव्यां सचतिवर्जम्, CA: 2.3.9; Whitney: 2.68; PS: 292. दिवस्पृष्ठम्, PS: 291; not found in CA. दीदायत्, CA: 4.3.17; Whitney: 4.89. दीदायादीनां द्वितीयस्य, CA: 3.1.22; Whitney: 3.22. दीर्घः प्रगृह्यश्च, CA: 1.3.11; Whitney: 1.73; PS: 153. दीर्घप्लुतयोः पूर्वा मात्रा, CA: 1.1.38; Whitney: 1.38; PS: 29. दीर्घप्लुतव्यवधाने च, PS: 131; not found in CA. दीर्घस्य विरामे, CA: 4.3.7; Whitney: 4.79. दीर्घायुत्वायादिषु च, CA: 2.2.20; Whitney: 2.59; PS: 276, 324. दीर्घायुत्वायादीनां च, CA: 4.3.29; Whitney: 4.100. दीर्घो नपुंसकबहुवचने, CA: 1.3.22; Whitney: 1.84; PS: 36. दुर उकारो दाशे परस्य मूर्धन्यः, CA: 2.3.1; Whitney: 2.60; PS: 280. दुर्णाम्नः, CA: 3.4.15; Whitney: 3.84. दूरादाह्वाने गाने रोदने…, PS: 169; not found in CA. दृशि सर्वनाम्नैकारान्तेन, CA: 4.2.23; Whitney: 4.69. देवताद्वन्द्वे च, CA: 4.2.3; Whitney: 4.49.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ717 द्यौश्च, CA: 2.3.15; Whitney: 2.74; PS: 298. द्रव्यार्थादेशा धातवः, PS: 61; not found in CA. द्वाभ्यामुकारः, CA: 4.4.19; Whitney: 4.118. द्वार्वारिति, CA: 2.2.6; Whitney: 2.45; PS: 308. द्वितीयचतुर्थाः सोष्माणः, CA: 1.1.12; Whitney: 1.10; PS: 19, 239. द्वितीयाः शषसेषु, CA: 2.1.6; Whitney: 2.6; PS: 206. द्विमात्रो दीर्घः, CA: 1.2.21; Whitney: 1.61; PS: 48. द्विरुक्ते चावगृह्ये, CA: 4.1.66; Whitney: 4.44. द्विवचनान्तौ, CA: 1.3.13; Whitney: 1.75; PS: 156. द्वे पदे क्रमपदम्, CA: 4.4.11; Whitney: 4.110. धातुस्थादयकारात्, CA: 3.4.8; Whitney: missing. नकारमकारयोर्लोपे पूर्वस्यानुनासिकः, CA: 1.3.5; Whitney: 1.66; PS: 229. नकारस्य च, CA: 2.1.34; Whitney: 2.34; PS: 232, 244. नकारस्य चटतवर्गेषु, CA: 2.1.26; Whitney: 2.26; PS: 242. नकारस्य शकारे ञकारः, CA: 2.1.10; Whitney: 2.10; PS: 212. न कृपादीनाम्, CA: 1.3.3; Whitney: 1.65. न घारिषां सुसहेत्येवमादीन्युदाहरेत् …, CA: 4.1.9; Whitney: p. 261. न चवर्गः, CA: 1.1.9; Whitney: 1.7; PS: 15. नञि व्यञ्जनेऽपि, PS: 273; not found in CA. न टवर्गस्य चवर्गे कालविप्रकर्षस्त्वत्र भवति …, CA: 2.1.39; Whitney: 2.39; PS: 259. न तकारसकाराभ्यां मत्वर्थे, CA: 4.2.1; Whitney: 4.47. न दीर्घात्, CA: 4.1.55; Whitney: 4.33. न दीर्घोपधे, PS: 139; not found in CA. नभेः, CA: 3.4.18; Whitney: missing. न मिनन्ति, CA: 3.4.17; Whitney: 3.86. नमौ सन्ध्यौ, CA: 3.2.14; Whitney: 3.37; PS: 104 (न समौ सन्ध्यौ). न युष्मदस्मदादेशा अनुदात्ताः …, CA: 4.1.15; Whitney: p. 262.

SŪTRA INDEX 718 नलोपेऽपि, CA: 2.4.9; Whitney: 2.89. नवतेश्च, CA: 3.4.13; Whitney: 3.82. न विभक्तिरूपरात्रिरथन्तरेषु, CA: 2.2.12; Whitney: 2.51; PS: 314. न विसर्जनीयः, CA: 3.2.6; Whitney: 3.29. नशेः षान्तस्य, CA: 3.4.22; Whitney: 3.90. न समो राजतौ, CA: 2.1.36; Whitney: 2.36; PS: 234. न समासे, PS: 166; not found in CA. न समैरयन्तादीनाम्, CA: 2.1.30; Whitney: 2.30; PS: 250. नसश्च, CA: 3.4.7; Whitney: missing. न सस्पदीष्ट, CA: 2.2.19; Whitney: 2.58. न सस्य दीर्घः, PS: 275, 323; not found in CA. न सृपिसृजिस्पृशिस्फूर्जिस्वरतिस्मरतीनाम्, CA: 2.4.22; Whitney: 2.102. नाकाराद्वकारस्य, CA: 2.1.22; Whitney: 2.22. नाख्यातानि समस्यन्ते न चाख्यातं च …, CA: 4.1.14; Whitney: p. 262. नादो घोषवत्स्वरेषु, CA: 1.1.15; Whitney: 1.13. नान्तगतं परेण, CA: 4.4.13; Whitney: 4.112. नान्तःपदे सन्ध्ये तकारे च, PS: 245; not found in CA. नाम नाम्नानुदात्तेन समस्तं …, CA: 4.1.3; Whitney: p. 261. नामानुदात्तं प्रकृतिस्वरो गतिरनुच्चो वा …, CA: 4.1.4; Whitney: p. 261. नामिकरेफात्प्रत्ययसकारस्य, CA: 2.4.7; Whitney: 2.87. नामोपसर्गगतिभिः समस्यन्ते …, CA: 4.1.17; Whitney: p. 262. नाम्युपधस्य रेफः, CA: 2.2.3; Whitney: 2.42; PS: 248, 265. नाम्युपधस्य रेफ ऋतूँरुत्सृजते …, CA: 2.1.29; Whitney: 2.29; PS: 248-9. नाम्युपधस्य सस्य षकारः, PS: 241; not found in CA. नारकादीनाम्, CA: 4.3.18; Whitney: 4.90. नारकादीनां प्रथमस्य, CA: 3.1.21; Whitney: 3.21. नाष्टनः, CA: 4.3.23; Whitney: 4.95. नासिक्यानां नासिका, CA: 1.1.26; Whitney: 1.26; PS: 11.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ719 निगृह्यानुयोगे च, PS: 176; not found in CA. निपातस्य स्वः, CA: 3.4.11; Whitney: missing. निपातोऽपृक्तोऽनाकारः, CA: 1.3.17; Whitney: 1.79; PS: 34, 160. निर्दुराविर्हविरसमासेऽपि, CA: 2.3.4; Whitney: 2.63; PS: 284. निवतस्पृणातौ, CA: 2.3.19; Whitney: 2.78; PS: 302. नोदात्तस्वरितपरम्, CA: 3.3.21; Whitney: 3.70. नैकारौकारयोः स्थानविधौ, CA: 1.1.41; Whitney: 1.41; PS: 32, 58. पञ्चजना लोकेषु, CA: 4.4.6; Whitney: 4.106. पञ्चम्याश्चाङ्गेभ्यः पर्यादिवर्जम्, CA: 2.3.8; Whitney: 2.67; PS: 289. पञ्चम्युत्तरस्य, PS: 88; not found in CA. पदाध्ययनमन्तादिशब्दस्वरार्थज्ञानार्थम्, CA: 4.4.7; Whitney: 4.107. पदान्तः पद्यः, CA: 1.1.5; Whitney: 1.3; PS: 63. पदान्तविकृतानाम्, CA: 4.3.9; Whitney: 4.81. पदान्तस्पर्शयुक्तस्य, CA: 3.4.21; Whitney: 3.89. पदान्तानामनुत्तमानां तृतीया घोषवत्स्वरेषु, CA: 2.1.2; Whitney: 2.2; PS: 197, 198. पदान्तावग्रहयोश्च, CA: 1.2.5; Whitney: 1.45; PS: 78. पदान्ते च, CA: 1.2.14; Whitney: 1.54; PS: 43. पदान्ते चाघोषाः, CA: 2.1.3; Whitney: 2.3; PS: 203. पदान्ते व्यञ्जनं द्विः, CA: 3.2.1; Whitney: 3.26; PS: 100, 102, 221. पदेनावर्जितेन, CA: 3.4.27; Whitney: 3.95. पद्यं च, CA: 1.2.17; Whitney: 1.57; PS: 46. परमेभ्योऽनापाके, CA: 2.4.14; Whitney: 2.94. परस्य स्वरस्य व्यञ्जनानि, CA: 1.2.15; Whitney: 1.55; PS: 44. परिधिष्पतातौ, CA: 2.3.18; Whitney: 2.77; PS: 301. परेः स्तृणातेः, CA: 2.4.25; Whitney: 2.105. परेर्हिनोतेः, CA: 3.4.20; Whitney: 3.88. पार्श्वबिन्दुद्वयो विसर्गः, PS: 72; not found in CA.

SŪTRA INDEX 720 पांसुमांसादीनाम्, CA: 1.3.23; Whitney: 1.85. पितुष्पितरि, CA: 2.3.14; Whitney: 2.73; PS: 297. पिप्पल्यादिषु पूर्वात्, CA: 3.2.5; Whitney: missing; PS: 224. पीडितः सन्नतरो हीनश्वासनादः, CA: 1.2.3; Whitney: 1.43; PS: 33. पुनर्णयामसि, CA: 3.4.12; Whitney: 3.81 पुमो मकारस्य स्पर्शेऽघोषेऽनूष्मपरे विसर्जनीयो…, CA: 2.1.25; Whitney: 2.25; PS: 237. पुरुष आ बभूवाँ ३ इत्यवसाने, CA: 1.3.8; Whitney: 1.70. पुंसश्च, CA: 1.3.29; Whitney: 1.91. पूर्याणः, CA: 3.4.14; Whitney: 3.83. पूर्वं तु भाषायाम्, PS: 180; not found in CA. पूर्वपदनिमित्तानाम्, CA: 4.3.3; Whitney: 4.75. पूर्वपदाद् द्रुघणादीनाम्, CA: 3.4.2; Whitney: 3.76. पूर्वपरयोरेकः, CA: 3.2.18; Whitney: 3.41; PS: 124. पूर्वरूपमित्यान्यतरेयः, CA: 3.3.29; Whitney: p. 174. पूर्वरूपस्य मात्रार्धं समानकरणं परम्, CA: 1.2.10; Whitney: 1.50. पूर्वस्यान्ते परस्यादौ, PS: 125; not found in CA. पूर्वं रेफश्चेत्स ऊर्ध्वगः, PS: 97; not found in CA. पूर्वस्वरं संयोगाविघातश्च, CA: 1.4.13; Whitney: 1.104; PS: 187. पूर्वेणाभिविपश्याम्यादिषु, CA: 4.1.26; Whitney: 4.4. पूर्वेणावग्रहः, CA: 4.1.29; Whitney: 4.7. पृष्ठे च, CA: 2.3.10; Whitney: 2.69; PS: 293. प्रकृतिदर्शनं समापत्तिः, CA: 4.3.1; Whitney: 4.73. प्रकृत्या वा, PS: 150; not found in CA. प्रगृह्यावगृह्यचर्चायां क्रमवदुत्तरस्मिन्नवग्रहः, CA: 4.4.24; Whitney: 4.124. प्रगृह्यावगृह्यसमापाद्यान्तर्गतानां द्विर्वचनं …, CA: 4.4.18; Whitney: 4.117. प्रगृह्याश्च प्रकृत्या, CA: 3.2.10; Whitney: 3.33; PS: 151. प्रतिश्रवणे चोदात्तम्, PS: 181; not found in CA.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ721 प्रत्यये व्यञ्जनमित्, PS: 70, 116; not found in CA. प्रथमान्तानि तृतीयान्तानीति शौनकस्य …, CA: 1.1.10; Whitney: 1.8; PS: 14, 17, 105, 200-201. प्रपणः पणतेरेव, CA: 4.3.26; Whitney: 4.97. प्रपराभ्यामेनः, CA: 3.4.6; Whitney: 3.80. प्रपराणिसमादुर्णिरवाधि …, CA: 4.1.19; Whitney: p. 262; PS: 64. प्रश्ने, PS: 191; not found in CA. प्राणति प्राणन्ति, CA: 4.2.11; Whitney: 4.57. प्रादूहोढयोर्वृद्धिः, PS: 146; not found in CA. प्रेत्य ज्योतिष्ट्वं कामयमानस्य, CA: 4.4.2; Whitney: 4.102. प्रे मुषिजीवपरे, CA: 2.3.17; Whitney: 2.76; PS: 300. प्लुतश्चाप्लुतवत्, CA: 4.4.21; Whitney: 4.120. बर्हिपथ्यप्सुदिविपृथिवीति च, CA: 2.4.20; Whitney: 2.100. बहुलं मतौ, CA: 3.1.17; Whitney: 3.17. बहुलं रात्रेः, CA: 3.1.8; Whitney: 3.8. बोधप्रतीबोधौ केसरप्राबन्धाया …, CA: 4.3.25; Whitney: 4.96. ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम्, CA: 3.4.10; Whitney: missing. ब्रह्मण्वत्यादीनाम्, CA: 4.3.28; Whitney: 4.99. ब्रू३हिप्रे३ष्यश्रौ३षड्…, PS: 173; not found in CA. भानोश्च, CA: 3.4.19; Whitney: 3.87. भिर्भ्यांभ्यःसु, CA: 4.1.53; Whitney: 4.31. भुवोमहसोर्लोके, PS: 316; not found in CA. भूतकरणस्य च, CA: 3.2.26; Whitney: 3.49. भोभगोअघोसां …, PS: 278; not found in CA. मकारस्य स्पर्शे परसस्थानः, CA: 2.1.31; Whitney: 2.31; 226. मतौ, CA: 4.1.39; Whitney: 4.17. मनस्पापे, CA: 2.3.20; Whitney: 2.79; PS: 303. मनुष्यत्, CA: 4.2.19; Whitney: 4.65.

SŪTRA INDEX 722 मयेऽसकारात्, CA: 4.1.46; Whitney: 4.24. मात्रे च, CA: 4.1.44; Whitney: 4.22. मामनुप्रतेप्रवामी …, CA: 4.1.16; Whitney: p. 262. मिथोऽवगृह्ययोर्मध्यमेन, CA: 4.1.64; Whitney: 4.42. मुखे विशेषाः करणस्य, CA: 1.1.18; Whitney: 1.18; PS: 2. मूर्धन्यानां जिह्वाग्रं प्रतिवेष्टितम्, CA: 1.1.22; Whitney: 1.22; PS: 6. मोऽनुस्वारः, PS: 225; not found in CA. यः पतौ गवामस्याः परवर्जम्, CA: 2.3.11; Whitney: 2.70; PS: 294. यज्ञततिर्न पृथग्वेदेभ्यः, CA: 4.4.4; Whitney: 4.104. यज्ञे पुनर्लोकाः प्रतिष्ठिताः, CA: 4.4.5; Whitney: 4.105. यत्तदेतेभ्यो वतौ, CA: 4.2.2; Whitney: 4.48. यत्रानेकोऽनुदात्तोऽस्ति परश्च …, CA: 4.1.6; Whitney: p. 261. यत्रोभे प्रकृतिस्वरे पूर्वं …, CA: 4.1.13; Whitney: p. 262. यथाशास्त्रं प्रसन्धानम्, CA: 4.4.23; Whitney: 4.122. यरोष्मापत्तौ च, CA: 1.3.6; Whitney: 1.68. यवलोपे, CA: 3.2.12; Whitney: 3.35; PS: 254, 264. यस्य चोत्तरपदे दीर्घो व्यञ्जनादौ, CA: 4.2.4; Whitney: 4.50. याज्ञिकैर्यथासमाम्नातम्, CA: 4.4.3; Whitney: 4.103. याज्यान्तःप्रणवश्च, PS: 172; not found in CA. यातुमावत्, CA: 4.1.30; Whitney: 4.8. यादाविच्छायां स्वरात् कर्मनाम …, CA: 4.1.51; Whitney: 4.29. यावयतेराख्याते, CA: 4.3.20; Whitney: 4.92. युष्मदादेशे तैस्त्वमादिवर्जम्, CA: 2.4.4; Whitney: 2.84. ये३यजामहे, PS: 171; not found in CA. योनावध्यैरयन्तादिषु च, CA: 4.1.27; Whitney: 4.5. रलोपे, CA: 3.1.20; Whitney: 3.20; PS: 321. रायस्पोषादिषु च, CA: 2.3.21; Whitney: 2.80; PS: 304. रेफपरस्य च, CA: 2.4.26; Whitney: 2.106.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ723 रेफप्रकृति घोषवत्स्वरेषु, PS: 305; not found in CA. रेफसकारयोर्विसर्गः पदान्ते, PS: 262; not found in CA. रेफस्य दन्तमूलानि, CA: 1.1.28; Whitney: 1.28; PS: 8 रेफस्य रेफे, CA: 2.1.19; Whitney: 2.19; PS: 318. रेफहकारक्रमजं च, CA: 1.2.18; Whitney: 1.58; PS: 47. रेफहकारौ परं ताभ्याम्, CA: 3.2.8; Whitney: 3.31; PS: 110. रेफादूष्मणि स्वरपरे स्वरभक्तिरकारस्यार्धं …, CA: 1.4.10; Whitney: 1.101; PS: 120-121. लकारविसर्जनीयौ च, CA: 1.1.7; Whitney: 1.5. लकारस्य रेफः पादमङ्गुरिमित्येवमा…, CA: 1.3.4; Whitney: 1.66; PS: 114. लकारस्योष्मसु, CA: 1.2.6; Whitney: 1.46; PS: 79. लेशवृत्तिरधिस्पर्शं शाकटायनस्य, CA: 2.1.24; Whitney: 2.24; PS: 108 लोप उदः स्थास्तम्भोः सकारस्य, CA: 2.1.18; Whitney: 2.18; PS: 220. वकारादौ च, CA: 4.1.40; Whitney: 4.18. वनियमिश्रथिग्लपीनाम्, CA: 4.3.21; Whitney: 4.93. वर्गविपर्यये स्फोटनः पूर्वेण चेद्विरामः, CA: 2.1.38; Whitney: 2.38; PS: 236. वर्णकार्यादर्शनं लोपः, PS: 75; not found in CA. वर्णग्रहे सवर्णमात्रम्, PS: 94; not found in CA. वर्णादन्त्यात्पूर्व उपधा, CA: 1.4.1; Whitney: 1.92; PS: 68. वर्णैक्यं संहिता, PS: 57; not found in CA. वर्तादिषु, CA: 3.1.12; Whitney: 3.12. वसुधातरः सहस्रसातमेति वसुसहस्राभ्याम्, CA: 4.1.67; Whitney: 4.45. वसौ ह्रस्वात्, CA: 4.1.57; Whitney: 4.35. वस्वन्तस्य पञ्चपद्याम्, CA: 1.3.26; Whitney: 1.88. वस्ववस्वप्नसुम्नसाधुभिर्या, CA: 4.1.52; Whitney: 4.30. वाक्यस्य टेः प्लुतः, PS: 168; not found in CA. वावृधानप्रभृतीनां च, CA: 4.3.13; Whitney: 4.85. वा सुपि, PS: 136; not found in CA.

SŪTRA INDEX 724 विकल्पो विभाषा, PS: 66; not found in CA. विचार्यमाणानाम्, PS: 179; not found in CA. विदेश्च, CA: 1.3.28; Whitney: 1.90. विद्मादीनां शरादिषु, CA: 3.1.16; Whitney: 3.16; PS: 320. विधायकस्य न, PS: 93, 118; not found in CA. विनामे च, CA: 4.1.56; Whitney: 4.34. विभक्तयागमप्रातिपदिकान्तस्य, CA: 3.4.4; Whitney: 3.78. विभाषा पृष्टप्रतिवचने हेः, PS: 175; not found in CA. विभाषाप्राप्तं सामान्ये, CA: 1.1.4; Whitney: 1.2. विवृततमा वृद्धिः, PS: 60; not found in CA. विवृततरौ गुणः, PS: 59; not found in CA. विवृत्तौ पादवृत्तः, CA: 3.3.14; Whitney: 3.63. विश्पतिर्विश्पत्नी, CA: 4.2.14; Whitney: 4.60. विश्वस्य नरवसुमित्रेषु, CA: 3.1.9; Whitney: 3.9. विश्वाद्दानीमि, CA: 4.1.45; Whitney: 4.23. विसर्गस्य स्वरे यकारः, PS: 252; not found in CA. विसर्जनीयस्य परसस्थानोऽघोषे, CA: 2.2.1; Whitney: 2.40; PS: 260. विसर्जनीयोऽभिनिष्ठानः, CA: 1.2.1; Whitney: 1.42; PS: 76. वृक्षाँ वनानीति वकारे, CA: 2.1.28; Whitney: 2.28; PS: 255. वृद्धेनैकाक्षरेण स्वरान्तेन, CA: 4.2.9; Whitney: 4.55. वेदाध्ययनं धर्मः, CA: 4.4.1; Whitney: 4.101. व्यञ्जनं परतः सन्धयेत्, PS: 109; not found in CA. व्यञ्जनविधारणमभिनिधानः, CA: 1.2.2; Whitney: 1.43; PS: 77. व्यञ्जनव्यवेतस्तैरोव्यञ्जनः, CA: 3.3.13; Whitney: 3.62. व्यञ्जनानि च, CA: 1.2.20; Whitney: 1.60; PS: 39. व्यञ्जनान्यव्यवेतानि स्वरैः संयोगः, CA: 1.4.7; Whitney: 1.98; PS: 54. व्यधावप्रत्यये, CA: 3.1.3; Whitney: 3.3. व्यधौ, CA: 4.2.22; Whitney: 4.68.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ725 व्यवाये शषलैः, CA: 3.4.25; Whitney: 3.93; PS: 112. व्यासेऽपि समानपदे, CA: 3.3.19; Whitney: 3.68. व्यासेऽपि समानपदे, CA: 3.3.23; Whitney: 3.72. शषसाः स्वरे, CA: 3.2.9; Whitney: 3.32. शषसेषु विसर्गः, PS: 274; not found in CA. शसि वीप्सायाम्, CA: 4.1.41; Whitney: 4.19. शकल्येष्यादिषु पररूपम्, CA: 3.2.29; Whitney: 3.52; PS: 140. शान्मान्दानाम्, CA: 1.3.25; Whitney: 1.87. शुनः पदे, CA: 3.1.10; Whitney: 3.10. शुनि तकारः, CA: 2.3.2; Whitney: 2.61; PS: 282. शेपहर्षणीं वन्दनेव वृक्षम्, CA: 2.2.17; Whitney: 2.56. श्वासोऽघोषेष्वनुप्रदानः, CA: 1.1.14; Whitney: 1.12. षकारस्य द्रोणिका, CA: 1.1.23; Whitney: 1.23; PS: 7. षकारान्नानापदेऽपि, CA: 2.1.16; Whitney: 2.16; PS: 218 षट्पुरसोरुकारोऽन्त्यस्य दशदाशयोरादेश्च मूर्धन्यः, CA: 1.3.1; Whitney: 1.63. षडेव स्वरितजातानि …, CA: 3.3.1; Whitney: p. 154. षत्वणत्वोपाचारदीर्घ …, CA: 4.3.2; Whitney: 4.74. षष्ठ्याश्चाशच्याः, CA: 2.3.12; Whitney: 2.17; PS: 295. षोडशी सन्देहात्, CA: 4.2.5; Whitney: 4.51. स एकपदः परिहार्यश्च परिहार्यश्च, CA: 4.4.27; Whitney: 4.126. संज्ञायाम्, CA: 4.2.21; Whitney: 4.67. संपरिभ्यां सकारादौ करोतौ, CA: 4.2.12; Whitney: 4.127. सप्तमी पूर्वस्य, PS: 89; not found in CA. समन्तः पूरणे, CA: 4.1.60; Whitney: 4.38. समानपदेऽनुत्तमात्स्पर्शादुत्तमे …, CA: 1.4.8; Whitney: 1.99. समानयमेऽक्षरमुच्चैरुदात्तं नीचै …, CA: 1.1.16; Whitney: 1.14-16; PS: 50. समानाक्षरस्य सवर्णे दीर्घः, CA: 3.2.19; Whitney: 3.42; PS: 126. समापाद्यानामन्ते संहितावद्वचनम्, CA: 4.4.25; Whitney: 4.124.

SŪTRA INDEX 726 समासयोश्च, CA: 4.1.65; Whitney: 4.43. समासावग्रहविग्रहान्पदे …, CA: 4.1.1; Whitney: p. 261. समासे च, CA: 4.1.31; Whitney: 4.9. समासे सकारः कपयोरनन्तः …, CA: 2.3.3; Whitney: 2.62; PS: 238, 283. समुद्रादिषु च, CA: 4.2.8; Whitney: 4.54. सलकारम्ऌवर्णम्, CA: 1.1.39; Whitney: 1.39; PS: 30. सस्थानकरणं सवर्णम्, PS: 56; not found in CA. सस्थाने च, CA: 3.2.7; Whitney: 3.30. सस्थाने लोपेऽनुनासिकः, PS: 258; not found in CA. संधौ पदान्ते च, PS: 165; not found in CA. संध्यक्षराणामयवायावः, CA: 3.2.17; Whitney: 3.40; PS: 115. संध्यक्षराणि संस्पृष्टवर्णान्येक…, CA: 1.1.40; Whitney: 1.40; PS: 31. संध्ये च वकारे, CA: 2.1.37; Whitney: 2.37; PS: 235 संपर्युपेभ्यः करोतौ च क्वचित्, PS: 240; not found in CA. संयुक्ते स्वेन धर्मेण, PS: 261; not found in CA. संयोगादि पूर्वस्य, CA: 1.2.16; Whitney: 1.56; PS: 45. संयोगादि स्वरात्, CA: 3.2.3; Whitney: 3.28; PS: 101, 230. संयोगे पूर्वं व्यञ्जनं पूर्वमुत्तरमुत्तरम्, PS: 96; not found in CA. सर्वतीक्ष्णोऽभिनिहितः …, CA: 3.3.3; Whitney: p. 154. सर्वमिति शाङ्खमित्रिः, CA: 3.3.33; Whitney: p. 174. सर्वस्मिन्नेवागमसकारादौ …, CA: 4.2.13; Whitney: 4.59. सर्वादीनि सर्वनाम, PS: 85; not found in CA. संवृतोऽकारः, CA: 1.1.36; Whitney: 1.36; PS: 27. संस्पृष्टरेफमृवर्णम्, CA: 1.1.37; Whitney: 1.37; PS: 28. सहावाडन्ते, CA: 4.2.24; Whitney: 4.70. सहावाडन्ते दीर्घः, CA: 3.1.1; Whitney: 3.1; PS: 319. संहितादार्ढ्यार्थम्, CA: 4.4.8; Whitney: missing. संहितायाम्, CA: 2.1.1; Whitney: 2.1; PS: 98, 196.

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ727 सहेः साड्भूतस्य, CA: 2.4.2; Whitney: 2.81. साढः, CA: 3.1.7; Whitney: 3.7. सात्रासाहादीनामुत्तरपदाद्यस्य, CA: 3.1.23; Whitney: 3.23. साधकतमा विभक्तिः, PS: 62; not found in CA. सान्तेभ्यः कुप्वोः, PS: 285; not found in CA. साह्याम, CA: 3.1.15; Whitney: 3.15. साह्याम, CA: 4.3.16; Whitney: 4.88. सीमन्ते ह्रस्वः, CA: 3.2.22; Whitney: 3.43; PS: 129. सुञः, CA: 2.4.17; Whitney: 2.94. सुप्राव्या च, CA: 4.1.33; Whitney: 4.11. सुभिषक्तमस्तमे, CA: 4.1.68; Whitney: 4.46. सोपसर्गं तु यन्नीचैः …, CA: 4.1.7; Whitney: p. 261. सोष्मणि पूर्वस्यानूष्मा, CA: 1.4.3; Whitney: 1.94. सौ च, CA: 1.4.54; Whitney: 4.32. स्तृतस्वस्वपिषु, CA: 2.4.6; Whitney: 2.86. स्त्रैषूयम्, CA: 2.4.8; Whitney: 2.88. स्त्रैषूयं नार्षदेन दुष्टरं त्रैष्टुभं …, CA: 4.3.11; Whitney: 4.83. स्थानार्था षष्ठी, PS: 87; not found in CA. स्थासहिसिचीनामकारव्यवायेऽपि, CA: 2.4.12; Whitney: 2.92. स्पर्शस्य स्पर्शेऽभिनिधानः, CA: 1.2.4; Whitney: 1.44; PS: 78. स्पर्शाः प्रथमोत्तमाः, CA: 1.1.8; Whitney: 1.6; PS: 13, 199. स्पर्शादुत्तमादनुत्तमस्यानुत्तमे, CA: 2.1.20; Whitney: 2.20; PS: 107. स्पर्शेषु सस्थानः स्ववर्गः, PS: 83; not found in CA. स्पृष्टं स्पर्शानां करणम्, CA: 1.1.29; Whitney: 1.29; PS: 20. स्वतवसः पायादेव, PS: 247; not found in CA. स्वरलोपे हन्तेः, CA: 3.4.23; Whitney: 3.91. स्वरवन्तीत्यान्यतरेयः, CA: 3.3.27; Whitney: p. 174. स्वराणां च, CA: 1.1.32; Whitney: 1.32; PS: 23.

SŪTRA INDEX 728 स्वराद्यवयोः पदान्तयोः, CA: 2.1.21; Whitney: 2.21; PS: 253. स्वरितस्यादितो मात्रार्धमुदात्तम्, CA: 1.1.17; Whitney: 1.17; PS: 51. स्वरितादनुदात्तमुदात्तश्रुतिः, CA: 3.3.22; Whitney: 3.71. स्वरितोदात्तेऽनन्तरमनुदात्तम्, CA: 3.3.25; Whitney: 3.74. स्वरे नामिनोऽन्तस्थाः, CA: 3.2.16; Whitney: 3.39; PS: 99. स्वरे मकारः, PS: 227; not found in CA. स्वरे यकारः, CA: 2.2.2; Whitney: 2.41; PS: 263. स्वरे यत्वं तल्लोपश्च, PS: 272; not found in CA. स्वरोऽक्षरम्, CA: 1.4.2; Whitney: 1.93; PS: 52. स्वरोपजनश्चादृष्टः पदेषु संहितायां च, CA: 4.4.10; Whitney: 4.109. स्वर्षाश्च, CA: 2.2.10; Whitney: 2.49; PS: 312. स्वादीरेरिणोर्वृद्धिः, PS: 142; not found in CA. हकारान्नासिक्येन, CA: 1.4.9; Whitney: 1.100. हनिगम्योः सनि, CA: 1.3.24; Whitney: 1.86. हिदिविभ्यामस्तेः, CA: 2.4.21; Whitney: 2.101. हिनोतेः, CA: 4.3.24; Whitney: 4.95. है३हेरामेति गुरोः स्वरादनृकाराच्चेति, PS: 185; not found in CA. ह्रस्वं लघ्वसंयोगे, CA: 1.2.11; Whitney: 1.51; PS: 40.

Index of Sanskrit Terms Note: This index exhaustively covers the vocabulary of the Sūtras of the CA. For the commentaries, only the technical terms are included. a 33, 39, 45, 119, 121, 127-129, 149, 150, 155-157, 162, 164, 165, 170, 211, 226, 244, 255- 257, 259, 294, 301, 309, 310, 320, 321, 348-353, 355, 359, 362, 367, 375, 379, 381, 382, 384, 391, 392, 410, 411, 413- 421, 426, 427, 432, 436, 440, 453, 454, 472, 515, 551, 557, 569, 589, 624, 633, 636, 638, 640, 644-646, 651, 655-657, 659-661, 663, 664, 679, 681 á 45 à 45 ã 45 ã́ 45 ã̀ 45 aK 412, 654, 655, 658, 659 akaḥ 310, 311, 684 akāra 12, 40, 50, 78 , 93, 128, 141, 155, 156, 165, 255-257, 259, 320, 321, 359, 384, 420, 426, 427, 453, 454, 475, 515, 569, 589, 632, 638, 643, 644, 645, 655-660, 663, 681 akāravyavāya 359 akārādi 515, 644 akārānta 93, 453, 454, 569, 645 akārārdha 655 akārottara 658 akāropadha 320, 321, 681 akṣara 11, 33, 74, 75, 120, 121, 136, 162, 164, 165, 186, 188, 189, 192, 193, 197-199, 242- 244, 250, 410, 412, 448, 450, 513, 514, 555-557, 618, 631, 635, 639, 641-644, 647, 648, 650, 654, 656, 658, 667, 668, 670-672, 675, 680, 685 akṣarasamāmnāya 35, 38, 49, 639 akṣarārtha 668 akṣarāśraya 644 agni 363 agra 132-136, 636 agrasta 34 aghoṣa 44, 58, 69, 73, 113, 114, 117, 119, 246, 265, 266, 288- 291, 305, 306, 316, 639, 640, 669, 672, 676, 677, 679 aghoṣatā 58 aghoṣaśvāsānupradāna 640 aṅga 71, 185, 192-194, 196, 198, 244, 515, 666 aṅgayukta 666 aṅguri 205 aṅebhyaḥ pari 335, 336 aC 195, 197, 224, 225, 299, 395, 403, 404, 431, 454, 495, 623, 639, 641, 643, 646, 686 acsadr̥śa 395 ajanta 495 ajbhakti 658 añcati 553

730 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS aṬ 359, 451, 456, 474, 591 aḍvyavāya 359 aṆ 212, 278, 283, 410, 649, 650 aṇumātrā 437, 439 aT 453, 454, 472, 473, 663 ataḥ 182, 648 atantra 125 atiṄ 649 atiprasakta 616 ativivr̥ta 155 atiśaya 686 atiśāyana 515 atiṣṭhipam 601 atisaṃspr̥ṣṭaprayatna 147 atpūrvasya 472, 473 atra 239, 348, 679, adanta 453, 454 adarśana 648 aduṣṭatā 686 adr̥ṣṭa 613 adha 392 adhara 76, 126-128, 130, 136, 137, 636 adharakaṇṭha 126-128 adharakaṇṭhya 126, 137, 636 adharahanumūla 130 adharauṣṭha 136, 137, 636 adharauṣṭhasparśana 137 adharauṣṭhya 136, 636 adhātu 454, 479, 648 adhi 370 adhika 259 adhikāra 263, 425, 442, 453, 467, 476, 637, 641, 656, 663, 666, 668, 674 adhikāranivr̥tti 453 adhikr̥ta 263 adhisparśa 107-110, 112, 287, 288, 637, 651, 652 adhodantapaṅkti 156 adhobhāga 121, 128, 130, 135, 137 adhyayana 610-614 adhyāhāra 676 adhvaparimāṇa 655 anaC 395 anañpūrva 331 anañsamāsa 681, 685 anaṭka 590-592 anati 537, 559 anatiśāyana 515 anadhikāra 476 ananudarśana 88, 106 ananunāsika 106, 249, 641 ananta 682 anantara 182, 446, 447, 645 anantya 199, 641, 642 anabhihita 34 anarthaka 500, 501, 503, 647 anarthāntara 620 analvidhi 210, 651 anavagraha 550 anahva 590-592 anākāra 223-225, 617, 641, 664 anākhyāta 649 anāṄ 224, 225, 641, 647 anāpāka 361 anāmin 686 anāmnāta 629 anārṣa 68, 81, 227-229, 249, 621, 664, 665 anārṣānta 621 aniṅga 510, 598 aniṅgya 510, 511, 548, 579, 598 aniṅgyatva 579 aniyoga 661 anirasta 34 aniścaya 661

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ731 aniṣṭa 158 aniṣṭarūpa 158 aniṣṭarūpāpatti 158 anukaraṇa 496, 497 anugati 487 anucca 480, 481 anuttama 69, 139, 251, 253, 263- 269, 283-285, 615, 652, 668, 670, 671 anuttarapadastha 683 anudarśana 88, 106 anudātta 11, 43, 75, 120-125, 173, 221, 247, 248, 425, 426, 428, 429-432, 434, 439, 441-447, 479, 480, 482, 484-487, 490, 491, 499, 500, 525, 611, 614, 641, 643, 644, 666 anudāttapūrva 429, 430 anudāttādi 611 anunāsika 40, 41, 106, 111, 113, 116, 125, 138-142, 189, 190, 207-214, 230-239, 249, 267, 297-300, 407, 408, 534, 622- 624, 636, 641, 642, 665, 669, 672, 674, 675, 678, 679 anunāsikatā 190 anunāsikatva 214, 623 anunāsikadīrghatva 622 anunāsikasthāna 140 anunāsikasvara 674 anunāsikādeśa 211 anunāsya 663 anupasarga 361 anupradāna 43, 63, 102, 113-119, 252, 637, 640 anuyoga 666 anuvartana 653 anuvr̥tti 349, 651, 659, 663, 685 anusvāra 39, 40, 42, 113, 139, 140, 151, 183-185, 188-190, 193, 194, 230-232, 234-236, 292, 296-299, 301, 356, 408, 471, 472, 636, 638, 642, 648, 673, 674, 675 anusvāravyañjanayoga 183 anusvārādhikāra 674 anūṣman 73, 84, 244, 245, 288- 290, 192, 291, 399, 670, 676 anūṣmapara 73, 288-290, 291, 676 anr̥kāra 666 anr̥t 642, 666 anl̥kāra 103, 412 aneka 499, 500, 513, 514, 632, 647 anekākṣara 513, 514 anekārtha 632, 647 anekārthaikaśabda 632 anoṣṭhya 680 anotpara 460 anaimittika 395 anta 68, 78, 88, 93, 99, 106, 136, 148, 171, 176, 177, 182, 183, 187-191, 193, 194, 198, 202, 208, 210, 212, 218, 219, 221, 226, 228, 235, 237, 238, 263- 269, 285, 314, 349, 365, 366, 374, 376, 383, 388, 389, 395, 397, 399, 418, 426, 429, 430, 433, 450, 454-456, 470, 492, 504, 511, 513, 523, 530, 533, 536, 537, 542, 543, 555-557, 562, 569, 570, 585, 595-597, 610, 611, 614-617, 621, 624, 626, 637, 642, 644, 647-650, 656, 657, 660, 661, 663-666, 668-670, 672-676, 680, 682- 684, 685

732 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS antaḥpada 172, 229-231, 296, 298, 299, 431, 432, 594, 641, 665, 675, 677 antaḥpātitva 177 antaḥpāda 168, 352, 420, 421, 663 antagata 616, 620, 621, 626 antajñāna 610 antar 146, 177, 594 antaraṅga 78, 646, 649 antaratama 144, 211, 246, 277 antarvartinī vibhaktiḥ 665 anta(ḥ)sthā 34, 35, 38, 39, 42, 73, 76, 119, 146, 147, 158, 182, 183, 246, 297, 410, 430-432, 434, 611, 618, 636, 638, 650, 651, 653, 671, 674, 681 anta(ḥ)sthāpatti 158, 430-432, 434, 611 antādivat 656 antādiśabdasvarārthajñāna 610 antodātta 432, 433, 492, 493, 504, 511, 523, 530, 536, 537, 614 antya 66, 68, 69, 73, 113, 128, 188, 199, 200, 241, 454, 520, 615, 639, 641, 642, 648, 657, 666 anya 182, 187, 257, 580, 642, 648, 655 anyatarasyām 269, 670, 671 anyayukta 500-503 anyayoga 620 anyayoganivr̥tti 620 anyāya 562 anyāyasamāsa 562 anyāśraya 644 anvaya 660 anvarthasaṃjñā 110 apa 362 apañcapadī 377, 432, 433 apada 533, 534, 618 apadādi 683 apadādhyāyin 611, 612 apadānta 177, 208, 210, 268, 349, 471, 675 apanodana 613 aparaparyāya 151 aparihārya 620 apavāda 572, 597, 646 api 279, 330, 331, 356, 357, 359, 360, 431, 432, 442, 443, 445, 446, 451, 453, 456, 468, 470, 474, 475, 482, 499, 500, 533- 535, 591, 600, 614, 626, 636, 637, 639, 641, 644, 646, 653, 656, 658, 659, 661, 663, 667, 670, 672, 673, 675, 677, 679, 681, 682 apūrṇa 112 apūrva 429, 430, 682 apr̥kta 68, 214, 215, 223-225, 616- 618, 623, 641, 663, 664 apr̥ktamadhya 616-618 apeta 645 apragr̥hya 164, 212 apratyaya 331, 375, 376, 454, 479, 648, 649 apratyayānta 376 aprathamā 378 aprayāvan 557, 558 apravr̥tti 686 aprasaṅga 395 aprāpta 369 aprāptavidhi 223 apluta 199, 248, 249, 259, 623- 625, 667 aplutavat 11, 199, 248, 249, 259, 623-625, 667 aplutavadbhāva 249, 259

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ733 apsu 366 abibhar 310, 311, 684 abhāva 644, 648, 655, 657, 658, 672, 677, 681, 686 abhi 370 abhighāta 114, 667 abhidhāna 610 abhidheya 610 abhinidhāna 73, 167, 169-173, 175-183, 251, 648 abhinipāta 167, 171, 172 abhiniṣṭ(h)āna 11, 167-169, 183- 186, 194, 259, 260, 648, 667, 678-681 abhiniṣṭānapara 259, 667 abhinihata 167 abhinihita 122, 167, 423, 424, 426, 437-440 abhipūjita 641, 666, 667 abhi vi tanu 500 abhi vi paśyāmi 502 abhi syāma pr̥tanyataḥ 372, 373 abhūṣaṇa 677 abheda 653 abhyaghāyanti 601 abhyantara 665, 675 abhyādāna 666 abhyāsa (study) 46 abhyāsa (reduplication) 67, 68, 71, 88, 358, 360, 384, 586, 588, 589, 627 abhyāsakr̥ta 627 abhyāsavinata 586 abhyāsavyavāya 360 aM 290 amanaḥprayoga 115 amāṅyoga 591 amātra 171, 172 amitākṣara 647 amī 222, 223, 664 amnaḥ 318, 319, 685 ampara 290, 677, 682 ay 285, 410, 411, 654, 680 ayakāra 460 ayasmayādi 193 ayāvādividhāna 654 ayoganivr̥tti 620 ayogavāha 49 ar 415, 416, 659, 660 arucibīja 657 artha 216, 217, 610, 634, 639, 647, 655, 664, 666, 667, 670, 674, 686 arthajñāna 610 arthabala 639, 670 arthadvaya 674 arthavat 454, 479, 648 arthātiśaya 686 arthādeśa 647 arthāntara 647, 664 arthāntaragamaka 647 ardha 70, 124, 125, 157, 164, 165, 168, 184, 185, 198, 212, 242, 255, 256, 449, 450, 506, 626, 642, 643, 655, 657, 679, 680 ardha akāra 655 ardhamātrā 43, 124, 157, 165, 198, 256, 642, 643, 657 ardharca 212, 450, 506, 616, 626 ardharcavirāma 212 ardharcādi 616 ardharcāntagata 616 ardhavisarga 168, 648, 679, 680 ardhavisargasadr̥śa 168, 648, 679 ardhavr̥ttadvayātmakalipi 680 ardhahrasva 76, 124, 125, 643 ardhākāravarṇa 256 aL 210, 241, 641

734 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS alakṣaṇa 205 alopa 540 alpaprāṇa 44 av 285, 410, 411, 654, 655, 680 ava 529 avakāra 533-535 avakr̥ṣṭa 172 avakr̥ṣṭatara 172 avagr̥hya 177, 540-542, 548, 556, 574, 576, 577, 579, 581, 583, 588, 613, 620, 621, 625, 626 avagr̥hyatva 577, 626 avagr̥hyapada 177, 556 avagr̥hyamāṇa 579, 598 avagraha 99, 123, 150, 176, 177, 201, 202, 230, 410, 436, 437, 443, 446, 450, 453, 466, 467, 478, 480, 499, 505-514, 517- 537, 539-547, 550-559, 561- 568, 570, 571, 577, 579-581, 584, 585, 598, 604, 605, 625, 626, 648 avagrahapada 177 avagrahasthāna 510 avaccheda 643 avati 509 avayava 648, 657 avarja 645 avarṇa 39, 50, 78, 128, 153, 162, 163, 226, 413-418, 557, 638, 659, 661, 662 avarṇakula 45, 50 avarṇavarja 645 avarṇānta 226, 417, 418, 557 avaśā 248, 249, 259, 667 avasanna 172, 173 avasannatara 172, 173 avasāna 78, 88, 106, 107, 145, 156, 176, 188, 194, 211-213, 265, 310, 314, 395, 396, 442, 443, 615, 621, 624, 637, 642, 648, 673, 680 avasānika 106 avikr̥ṣita 510 avighāta 258, 259 avibhakti 648 avibhaktika 221 avidhīyamāna 649, 650 avirāma 156 avivakṣaṇa 641 avivakṣita 641 aviśeṣa 533 avaidika 214 avyañjanamiśraśuddhakevalasvara 617 avyapara 663 avyaya 315, 319, 497, 570, 685 avyaveta 182, 249, 250 aŚ 285, 682 aśabda 115 aśuddhīkaraṇa 92 aśūdrādhikāra 666 aṣṭa 375, 599, 600 aṣṭama 257, 259, 655 asaṃyoga 111, 182, 185, 186, 642 asaṃśliṣṭa 641 asakāra 71, 522 asattva 479, 641 asandigdha 641 asandeha 151 asamartha 489 asamāsa 330, 331, 453, 456, 600, 682 asamparka 685 asampr̥kta 663 asarūpa 53 asarvanāman 310, 311, 684 asavarṇa 589

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ735 asaṃvr̥ta 645 asasthāna 84, 268 asahavarṇa 650 asāmarthya 489, 502 asāṃhitika 618 asiddha 78, 250, 281, 408, 471, 505, 649, 672 asiddhavat 250 asti 367 asthita 126 aspr̥ṣṭa 44, 147, 149, 150, 154, 638 asme 220, 221, 664 asyāḥ 338, 338 asvara 188, 447, 644, 652 ahan, ahar 317, 443, 444, 685 ahār 312, 313, 684 ahorātre 552, 553 ahrasva 392, 533, 534 ā 39, 45, 52, 73, 119, 121, 127, 128, 149, 152, 154-156, 170, 209, 210, 223-226, 241, 244, 246-248, 286, 292-294, 301, 309, 310, 321, 348-353, 355, 382, 408-410, 413-415, 417- 419, 475, 525, 547, 556, 565, 583, 594, 610, 617-619, 624, 636, 638, 639, 647, 651, 664, 678-681 ā́ 45, 248, 307 ā̀ 45 ā̃ 45 ā̃́ 45 ā̃̀ 45 ā3 45, 119, 127, 128, 149, 164, 165 ā́3 45, 247, 248 ā̀3 45 ā̃3 45, 624 ā̃́3 45 ā̃̀3 45 ākāṅkṣā 666 ākāra 45, 50, 78, 78, 154, 155, 209, 223-225, 241, 247, 248, 286, 292, 293, 321, 408, 409, 507, 513, 565, 610, 617, 619, 638, 639, 641, 647, 656, 664, 678, 679, 681 ākārapraśleṣa 78, 639 ākāravarjita 475 ākārāgama 507 ākārānta 513 ākāropadha 241, 292, 293, 321, 678, 679, 681 ākr̥ti 33, 53, 361 ākr̥tigaṇa 361, 465 ākr̥tigrahaṇa 53 ākṣipta 12, 75, 120, 121, 643 ākṣepa 644, 658 ākhyā 302, 537 ākhyāta 98, 226, 227, 410, 478, 479, 482, 488, 489, 498, 500, 502, 594, 596, 597, 632, 634, 649, 687 ākhyāna 641 āgama 68, 181, 454, 456, 476, 560, 561, 562, 629, 646, 655, 659, 670, 680, 686 āgamanakāra 456 āgamavat 562 āgamasakāra 560 āgamasakārādi 560 āgamādeśakāla 651 āgamādeśabala 646 āṄ 224, 225, 408, 451, 474, 641, 647, 662, 664 ācamana 610 ācāryanāman 640

736 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS āṬ 374, 418, 570 āḍanta 374, 570 āT 164 ātmanebhāṣā 629 ātva 547 ādi 66, 74, 78, 99, 123, 145, 176, 177, 182, 192, 193, 198, 201, 205, 209, 230, 232, 233, 244, 294, 295, 319, 320, 335, 336, 350, 352, 361, 364, 365, 366, 369, 370, 376, 383, 386, 388, 390-392, 398, 399, 405, 416- 419, 426, 452, 462, 473, 492, 503, 515, 517, 526, 533, 534, 536, 537, 547, 550, 552, 555, 557, 559, 560, 562, 564, 571, 573, 579, 580, 582, 585, 586, 590, 595, 603, 604, 610-612, 634, 636, 641, 642, 649, 651, 656, 659-661, 663, 665, 666, 673, 674, 677, 678, 681, 682, 685 ādigrahaṇa 205 āditaḥ 123-125, 643 ādibhūta 651 ādima 670 ādimadhyāntalupta 562 ādimākṣara 670 ādisaṃśaya 552 ādeśa 78, 176, 201, 210, 211, 221, 233, 285, 351, 352, 355, 357, 406, 426, 440, 455, 489, 617, 618, 646, 647, 653, 654, 656, 659, 661-663, 670, 676, 677, 679-682, 685 ādya 128, 391, 636, 658 ādyakṣara 648 ādyanta 649 ādyudātta 244, 481, 487, 488, 492, 493, 536, 537, 571 ādhikya 679 ān 290, 292, 573, 574 ān̐ 290 ānaṄ 549 ānunāsikya 45, 641 ānupūrvya 139, 408 āntaratamya 45, 55, 56, 120, 144, 246, 277, 640 āntaratamyaparīkṣā 640 āntarya 246, 277, 296, 305, 410 ānpada 573, 574 ānyabhāvya 41, 111 āpatti 158, 208-210, 430-432, 434 āpāka 367 ā babhūvā̃3 211-213, 248, 249, 259, 504, 667 ābhyantara 51, 76-78, 117, 118, 145, 146, 148, 635, 636, 639 ābhyantaprayatna 51, 76-78, 117, 118, 145, 146, 148, 635, 636 āmantrita 68, 227, 228, 313, 314, 479, 524, 664, 665, 685 āmnāta 493, 608, 629, 634 āmnāna 607, 608 āmnāya 35, 38, 49, 634, 639 āmreḍita 91, 329, 538, 539, 666 āmreḍitasamāsa 91, 329, 539 āy 285, 410, 411, 654, 680 āyāma 643 ār 416-418, 659, 660 ārtnī iva 229, 665 āryā 189 ārṣa 78, 227-229, 249, 621, 659, 664, 665, 686 āyuḥ 342, 343, 684 āv 285, 410, 411, 654, 680 āvar 310, 311, 684

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ737 āvarjita 475 āviḥ 330-332, 682 āśā 571 āśis 666, 667 āśī3ḥ 259, 504, 505, 667 āśīrvacana 665 āśraya 644, 653, 667 āsī3t 259 āsthāpita 180, 181, 627, 628, 648 āsya 51, 52, 70, 126, 140, 412, 635, 638, 645, 646 āsyaprayatna 51, 52, 70, 126, 140, 141, 146, 156, 276, 412, 635, 638, 645 āsyayatna 646 āhuḥ 303, 679 āhvāna 665 i 39, 83, 119, 121, 131, 132, 149, 150, 153, 162, 164, 165, 216, 223, 244, 247, 248, 255, 277, 305, 349, 359, 377, 378, 380, 409-414, 427-429, 440, 454, 524, 525, 533, 534, 569, 583, 585, 589, 618, 624, 636, 638, 640, 644, 646, 651, 657, 659, 663, 664 í 427-429, 430, 433, 440 ĩ 43 iK 377, 410, 431, 536 ikāra 132, 141, 165, 223, 247, 248, 427-429, 533, 534, 569, 618, 651, 657, 659, 663 ikārānta 569 iṅga 598 iṅgita 548 iṅgya 11, 541, 542, 579, 581, 598, 606 iṅgyamāna 579-581 iṅgyavat 598, 606 icchā 527, 528 iṬ 534 iḍāyāḥ 339, 683 iṆ 349, 355, 357, 359 it 78, 648, 654, 655 iT 164, 331 iti 11, 12, 55-57, 70, 72, 81, 100- 102, 106, 111, 112, 116, 122- 124, 132, 133, 139, 140, 144, 155, 156, 158-161, 163, 165, 166, 169, 171, 174, 185, 189, 192, 193, 198-200, 205-207, 209, 211, 212, 214-230, 232, 233, 238, 239, 247-250, 259, 260, 286, 289, 290-292, 294- 296, 299-301, 303, 310-312, 317, 318, 326, 330, 332, 337, 339-346, 348, 350, 351, 359, 362, 363, 367, 369, 370, 375, 379, 381, 386, 392, 413, 428, 447-449, 452, 453, 458, 467, 476, 484, 489, 493, 504, 507, 509, 511, 514, 523, 526, 529, 533, 534, 536, 550, 553, 557, 558, 563, 566, 567, 571, 573- 575, 577-579, 583-585, 587, 588, 590, 593, 601, 610, 617, 618, 620-627, 637-639, 642, 645-650, 653, 655-661, 663- 665, 667, 668, 670, 676-678, 680, 681, 684, 685 itikaraṇa 217, 230, 249, 622 itikāra 230 itipara 229, 623, 665 itipūrva 624 itimadhya 620, 621 itva 524, 525 itvaN 524 idam ū ṣu 376, 603

738 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS idā3m 259, 667 iyaṄ 589 iyā3m 259, 667 iva 229, 230, 322, 323, 539, 540, 626, 646, 665 ivarṇa 50, 72, 74, 131, 153, 163, 412-414, 659 ivasU 534 iha 2, 62, 63, 72, 83, 100-102 ī 39, 119, 121, 131, 149, 216-218, 223, 244, 412, 413, 427-429, 433, 569, 638, 648, 656, 659, 661, 664 ī́ 432, 433 R_i_macron_grave 440 ī3 119, 131, 149, 164, 659 īkāra 68, 69, 216-218, 569, 656, 661, 664 īkārānta 217, 569 īT 219, 223 īdanta 223 īyas 236 īyasUN 237 īṣatspr̥ṣṭa 44, 77, 78, 146-148, 151, 636, 638 īṣadvivr̥ta 44, 57, 147, 149, 151, 155, 638 īṣadvivr̥takaraṇa 149 u 33, 39, 56, 119, 121, 136, 137, 149, 150, 153, 162, 164, 165, 174, 201, 202, 214, 215, 224- 227, 244, 255, 301, 320, 321, 326, 327, 349, 376, 377, 407, 410, 414, 433-435, 461, 534, 536, 574, 584, 589, 617-620, 623, 632, 636, 638, 640, 643, 644, 646, 653, 657, 659, 663, 664, 680-682 ú 429, 430, 433 ũ 43 ukāra 66, 68, 136, 137, 141, 165, 201, 214, 225, 320, 321, 326, 407, 433, 434, 617, 620, 622, 623, 632, 643, 653, 657, 663, 681, 682 ucca 480, 481, 492, 493 uccāra 124, 128, 132-136, 139, 156, 185, 194, 635, 636, 637, 642, 643, 679 uccārakāla 642 uccāraṇa 125, 130, 135, 139, 143, 197, 199, 200, 640, 648, 653- 655, 679, 680 uccāraṇakāla 679 uccāraṇasāmarthya 654 uccāraṇasthāna 125, 130, 143 uccāraṇārtha 655 uccārasthāna 124, 128, 132 uccaiḥ 11, 74, 120, 121, 643 uñ 68, 225, 226, 376 uT 164, 331, 649 uttama 69, 72, 101, 104, 113, 139, 251, 253, 263-269, 283-285, 615, 636, 637, 652, 668-671 uttamatva 668 uttara 78, 122, 125, 127, 136, 164, 168, 181, 202, 251, 253, 263, 281, 282, 285, 286, 327, 355, 357, 358, 363, 364, 366, 367, 370, 371, 383, 391, 395, 422, 448, 451, 458, 466, 550, 583, 611, 625, 626, 648-650, 654, 657, 658, 670, 683 uttarakaṇṭha 127 uttarapada 168, 202, 327, 361, 364, 383, 391, 550, 583, 611, 683 uttarapadastha 361, 364, 683 uttarapadādi 202, 327

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ739 uttarapadādya 391 uttararūpa 448 uttarastha 362 uttarasthasakāra 362 uttarārdha 122, 125 uttarāvayava 648, 657 uttarottara 646 uttarauṣṭha 136 utva 174, 202, 327, 681, 685, 686 utsarga 63, 102 ud 282, 563, 564, 672 udaya 397, 437 udātta 11, 43, 75, 76, 120-125, 173, 200, 220, 221, 244, 247, 248, 410, 425, 426, 428, 429, 431-434, 437, 439-447, 479- 488, 490-493, 498, 504, 505, 511, 519, 521, 523-525, 530, 536, 537, 571, 591, 611, 614, 641, 643, 644, 664, 666 udāttatara 123 udāttatā 124 udāttapara 444 udāttavat 482 udāttaśruti 445, 446, 611 udāttasvaritapara 173, 441, 444, 447 udāttasvaritodaya 437, 439, 611 udāttānta 611 udit 649 udghāṭita 156 upacāra 609 upajana 613 upajāta 507, 508, 554 upadiṣṭa 250 upadeśa 331, 456 upadhā 68, 69, 73, 74, 191, 241- 243, 292-296, 308, 309, 320, 321, 326, 331, 348, 349, 352- 354, 396, 397, 648, 658, 661, 669, 673, 677-679, 681, 682, 683 upadhmā 677, 678 upadhmānīya 39, 41, 42, 72, 74, 111, 117, 136, 137, 168, 169, 305, 307, 582, 636, 640, 648, 679, 680 upapada 294, 311, 372, 379, 481, 634 upapadavibhakti 634 upabaddha 292, 293, 678 upamā 666 upamārtha 666 upayoga 639 upariṣṭād binduḥ 648 uparṣanti 416, 417 upalakṣaṇa 186, 251 upasañcaya 111 upasaṃhāra 43, 128, 151 upasarga 64, 68, 98, 225, 226, 331, 356-361, 366, 382, 383, 410, 416, 417, 453, 456, 457, 459-461, 468, 470, 478, 479, 481-484, 486-490, 492-494, 497-505, 511, 533-535, 627, 628, 634, 647-649, 659, 660, 661, 675, 677, 678, 687 upasargapūrva 489, 502 upasargavr̥tti 481, 493, 494, 497, 499, 500 upasargasamāsa 533-535 upasargastha 357, 359, 360, 457 upasr̥ṣṭa 534, 535 upasthita 248, 249, 624 upāṃśu 114, 115 upācāra 572-574 upādāna 395 ubha 299, 300, 675

740 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS ubhaya 520, 521 ubhayathā 685 ubhayadharma 643 uras 43 urasya uvaṄ 589 uvarṇa 78, 137, 153, 163, 320, 414, 434, 659 ū 39, 119, 121, 136, 149, 216-218, 244, 414, 433, 434, 584, 589, 638, 643, 648, 653, 656, 664 ū́ 433 ũ 214, 215, 225, 623, 663 ū3 119, 136, 149, 164, 643 ūkāla 197, 643 ūkāra 69, 216-218, 433, 434, 653, 656, 664 ūkārānta 217 ūṬH 662 ūT 219 ūdhaḥ 318, 319, 685 ūrdhvaga 650 ūrdhvadantāgra 137 ūrdhvabhāga 121, 137 ūṣman 34, 35, 38-42, 73, 77, 84, 110-112, 146-149, 151, 178, 179, 182, 188, 208-210, 244, 245, 255, 256, 288, 289, 291, 297-299, 399, 637, 638, 642, 648, 655, 670, 671, 674-676, 679, 680 ūṣmānta 188, 642 r̥ 33, 39, 56, 57, 73, 75, 76, 78, 102-104, 119, 121, 129, 130, 133, 144, 149, 150, 157, 158, 159, 203, 213, 214, 244, 255, 256, 349, 365, 366, 368, 410, 415-418, 451, 466, 467, 473, 638-640, 642, 644, 653, 656- 658-660, 665-667, 677, 678 ∂r∂ 157, 213 ∂r∂̐ 213 ∂rr∂ 157 r̥l̥varṇasāvarṇya 161 r̥kāra 52, 76, 133, 141, 256, 365, 366, 417, 418, 466, 467, 653, 656-658, 666, 667, 678 r̥kāravarjita 667 r̥kārasvarabhakti 256 r̥kārādi 417, 418 r̥kārānta 365, 366 r̥gardharca 450, 506 r̥T 417, 467, 549, 642 r̥ta 391, 392 r̥ti 256 r̥tũr ut sr̥jate vaśī 294, 295, 678 r̥l̥varṇayoḥ sāvarṇyam 653, 658 r̥varṇa 72, 78, 157-161, 203, 213, 256, 368, 415-417, 451, 639, 653, 659, 665 r̥varṇastharepha 203 r̥ṣiproktamantra 612 r̥̄ 39, 73, 119, 121, 129, 149, 157, 159, 160, 244, 415, 638, 656 r̥̄3 119, 129, 149, 157, 159 r̥̄kāra 656 l̥ 39, 56, 72, 73, 103, 119, 121, 129, 130, 135, 136, 149, 150, 160-162, 203, 244, 349, 410, 412, 413, 636, 638-641, 644, 653, 656, 658-660 ∂l∂ 160 ∂ll∂ 160 l̥kāra 52, 78, 103, 121, 135, 161, 203, 656, 658-660 l̥tva 658

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ741 l̥varṇa 72, 129, 142, 160, 161, 639, 653 l̥̄ 39, 119, 123, 129, 149, 160, 161 l̥̄3 119, 149, 160-162 e 33, 39, 53, 71-74, 76, 119, 121, 127, 128, 131, 132, 142, 144, 149, 150, 152-155, 162-164, 166, 211, 219-221, 228, 244, 248, 249, 255, 277, 285, 305, 320, 349, 409, 411, 418, 420, 421, 426, 455, 521, 569, 610, 618, 636, 638, 639, 644, 646, 648, 654, 659, 661, 663, 664, 681 é 440 è 440 e3 119, 149 ẽ 43, 624 eka 54, 68, 112, 137, 159, 162, 163, 165, 196-198, 210-212, 233, 313, 314, 406, 411, 412, 414, 426, 440, 445, 453, 555- 557, 562, 611, 613, 617, 618, 627, 639, 641, 642, 646, 647, 652, 655, 656, 661-663, 674, 679, 681, 685 ekakālāvaccheda 643 ekatva 112, 618 ekadeśa 562, 679 ekadeśalopa 562 ekadha 652 ekapada 541, 542, 613, 627, 628, 653 ekapadabhāva 542 ekapadāśraya 653 ekapadībhāva 541 ekamātra 159, 196-198, 642 ekamātrākāla 197, 198 ekamātrika 159, 198 ekamātroccāra 642 ekaya 652 ekavacana 212, 314, 685 ekavacanānta 212 ekavat 163, 225 ekavadbhāva 137 ekavadvr̥tti 225 ekavarṇavat 54, 162, 163, 165, 639 ekavibhakti 652 ekaśeṣa 639, 652, 655, 674 ekaśruti 445, 611 ekasvara 647 ekākṣara 492, 493, 555-557 ekāC 224, 641, 647 ekādeśa 78, 210, 211, 233, 406, 426, 440, 617, 618, 656, 661- 663, 681 ekādhikārarūpa 656 ekāmantrita 313, 314, 685 ekāra 152, 162, 164-166, 199, 219, 221, 248, 249, 320, 413, 414, 418, 420, 426, 455, 569, 610, 618, 638, 639, 644, 647, 654, 659, 661, 663, 664, 681 ekārādi 644 ekārānta 569, 610, 663, 664, 681 ekāraukārānta 420, 426 ekārthānekaśabda 632 ekāL 224, 641 ekībhavana 646 eke 150, 255, 638, 655 eṄ 153, 163, 413, 661-663 eṅanta 663 eṅādi 661, 662 eC 164, 408, 410, 418, 419, 654 eT 70, 72 eta(d) 547 etāvattva 294, 311, 372, 379

742 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS etva 661 edyubhi 520 edyusUC 521 ena 457, 458 enā ehāḥ 405 eva 298, 299, 326, 337, 392, 422, 482, 487, 533-535, 550, 556, 571, 579, 584, 601, 620, 624- 626, 637-640, 645, 649, 651, 653, 655, 656, 659, 661, 663, 667-670, 672, 674, 675, 677, 678, 680, 682, 684, 686 evam 2, 62, 63, 72, 83, 100-102, 205, 294, 678 eṣa 324, 681, 685 o 33, 39, 53, 71-74, 76, 119, 121, 127, 128, 132, 136, 142, 144, 149, 150, 152-155, 162-164, 166, 174, 224-228, 244, 285, 320, 349, 411, 414, 419, 420, 421, 426, 461, 619, 636, 638, 639, 644, 646, 647, 654-656, 659, 661, 663, 664, 680, 681 ó 440 ò 440 o3 119, 136, 149 õ 43 ŏ 156 okāra 72, 74, 78, 137, 152, 162, 164-166, 225, 226, 228, 320, 414, 419, 420, 426, 619, 638, 639, 647, 654-656, 659, 661, 663, 664, 681 okārānta 226, 228, 663, 664, 681 oṇyoḥ 435 oT 461 otva 174 odanā3ḥ 259, 667 om 631, 633, 662, 666 oṣadhi 377-379 oṣṭha 39, 43, 128, 132, 136, 137, 139, 141, 142, 144, 151, 156 oṣṭhanāsika 139, 141 oṣṭhasthāna 136, 141 oṣṭhya, 54, 55, 72, 74, 75, 136- 138, 141, 636, 680 oṣṭhyayoni 680 oṣṭhyasvara 680 ai 33, 39, 53, 71, 74, 76, 119, 121, 127, 128, 131, 132, 142, 144, 149, 150, 152, 153, 155, 162- 166, 244, 285, 349, 411, 418, 556, 636, 638, 639, 644, 646, 647, 654, 659, 661, 680 ai3 119, 149, 165 ā3i 165 aikāra 50, 152, 163, 164, 166, 418, 638, 639, 647, 654, 659, 661 aikya 646 aiC 153, 163, 164 aiT 70, 72, 74, 128 au 33, 39, 71, 74, 76, 119, 121, 127, 128, 132, 136, 142, 144, 149, 150, 152, 153, 155, 162- 164-166, 244, 285, 349, 411, 414, 419, 556, 636, 638, 639, 644, 646, 647, 654, 661, 662, 664, 680 au3 119, 136, 149, 165 ā3u 165 aukāra 152, 163-166, 419, 638, 639, 647, 654, 661 auT 74, 128 aurasya 112, 636 aurasyahakāra 112, 636 auṣṭhya 636 ṃ 39, 40, 42, 49, 139, 638, 648 ँ् 675

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ743 ḥ 39, 40, 42, 49, 90, 104, 127-130, 167, 169, 174, 210, 260, 288, 292, 305, 306, 308-310, 312, 314, 316-322, 324, 326-328, 330, 332, 334, 335, 337-346, 348, 401, 573, 574, 636, 638- 640, 648 ḫ (jihvāmūlīya) 39, 41, 42, 49, 130, 169, 174, 305, 582, 636, 639, 640, 648, 677, 680 ẖ (upadhmānīya) 39, 41, 42, 49, 136, 137, 169, 174, 305, 582, 636, 639, 640, 648, 677 k 33, 39, 41, 42, 50, 56, 116, 117, 127, 129, 130, 138, 169, 251, 271, 273, 284, 301, 302, 305, 307, 328, 330, 332, 333, 349, 355, 418, 573, 574, 636, 640, 649, 655, 670, 671, 679, 682, 683 k̐ 138, 251, 254 ka 69, 76, 78, 84, 91, 104, 112, 117, 125, 129, 130, 145, 176, 181, 271, 272, 284, 306, 328, 348, 354, 355, 359, 636, 640, 649, 655, 670, 671, 679, 682, 683 ka (suffix) 522, 523 kakāra 50, 141, 655, 670 kaṇṭha 39, 43, 71, 75, 116, 121, 126-130, 132, 141, 142, 144, 153, 155, 156, 636, 640, 679 kaṇṭhatālavya 71, 74, 76, 144, 153 kaṇṭhatālu 132, 142, 144 kaṇṭhatālunāsika 142 kaṇṭhanāsika 141 kaṇṭhabila 128, 130 kaṇṭhasthāna 127 kaṇṭhoṣṭhaja 71, 74, 76, 144 kaṇṭhoṣṭhanāsika 142 kaṇṭhauṣṭha 132 kaṇṭhauṣṭhya 153 kaṇṭhya 74, 126-129, 137, 141, 636, 651, 679 kampa 123, 439 kar 310, 311, 684 karaṇa 43, 51, 54, 55, 63, 70, 75, 76, 77, 102, 114, 115, 125-127, 129, 131, 133-152, 154, 155, 184, 185, 635, 637, 638, 645, 646 karaṇamadhya 134, 148 karaṇavat 115 karat 332, 683 karam 332, 683 karoti 525, 559, 676, 677 karṇa 332, 683 kartr̥ 103 karman 527, 528, 607, 608 karmanāman 527, 528 karmapravacanīya 360, 482, 486, 487, 500-503 karmaśeṣa 607 karṣaṇa 303, 679 kavarga 40, 50, 72, 78, 129, 148, 306, 355, 636, 649, 679, 683 kavi 437, 439 kaṣayoga 670 kādi 145, 176, 636 kāmayamāna 607, 608 kāmya 538, 539 kāmyaC 538, 539 kāraka 481, 634 kārakavibhakti 634 kāraṬ 640 kāraṇa 609 kārita 595-597 kāritānta 595-597

744 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS kārmanāmika 528 kārya 609, 646, 648-650, 653, 655, 656 kāryādarśana 648 kāryopacāra 609 kāla 43, 45, 185, 197, 199, 215, 217, 230, 303, 450, 467, 506, 577, 613, 621, 642, 643, 645, 679 kālaviprakarṣa 303, 679 Ki-KiN 71, 533, 534 kiñcidadhikaśvāsoccārasahita 637 kit 649 kU 129, 251, 349, 355, 357, 359, 451, 456, 474, 677, 679, 682, 685 kUK 271, 671 kutva 251 kuru 332, 683 kr̥ṇotu 332, 683 kr̥t 71, 454, 480, 481, 487, 523- 525, 533, 534, 543, 649 kr̥tadīrgha 174 kr̥ti 86, 90, 332, 683 kr̥tva 66, 525, 526 kr̥tvas 66, 525, 526 kr̥danta 487, 543, 649 kr̥dhi 86, 90, 332, 683 kr̥pā 203, 204 kr̥pi 202, 203, 590, 591 kevala 192, 407-409, 574, 617, 636, 645, 650, 656, 682 keśaveṣṭa 413 kesaraprābandhāyāḥ 601 komala 423 krama 111, 112, 165, 195, 196, 212, 244, 249, 255, 311, 313, 315, 316, 319, 326, 394, 397, 403, 404, 429, 572-588, 590- 592, 595, 596, 598-605, 612- 623, 625-628, 635, 642, 654, 670, 675, 676 kramakāla 577, 613, 621, 626 kramaja 196, 255, 403, 642 kramapada 583, 584, 614-619, 625 kramaparihāra 626 kramapāṭha 212, 249, 311, 313, 315, 316, 319, 326, 429, 572- 588, 590-592, 595, 596, 598- 605, 612-623, 625-628, 635, 675, 676 kramavat 576, 577, 625, 626 kramādhyayana 612-614 kriyāpradhāna 479 kriyāyoga 481, 492, 497, 647, 648 kriyāvācin 479 klībatā 152 kvacit 421, 484, 667, 676, 677, 681, 686 KvasU 235, 236, 534 KvIP 376 kṣubhna 473 kṣaipra 122, 146, 423, 424, 429- 435, 437, 439, 440, 509 kṣaiprasandhi 146 kh 39, 41, 42, 50, 56, 116, 117, 130, 169, 251, 289, 305, 307, 349, 355, 640, 670, 671, 676, 679 kh̐ 139, 251, 254 kha 111, 112, 117, 129, 130, 640, 670, 671, 679 khaṇvakhā3i khaimakhā3i 247, 248, 259, 667 khatva 670 khaY 290, 640, 682 khaR 266, 310, 314, 672, 680

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ745 g 39, 41, 50, 56, 116, 117, 245, 251, 284, 302, 349, 418, 640 g̐ 118, 119, 139, 251 ga 112, 119, 129, 130, 250, 251, 640 gakāra 250 gati 480-483, 486, 487, 489, 490, 492, 494, 496, 497, 501, 647, 648 gami 85, 234 gavām 338, 339 gaviṣṭi 286, 287 gāna 665 guṇa 40, 41, 45, 58, 98, 99, 111, 112, 418, 649, 687 guṇa (ref. adeṅ guṇaḥ, P.1.1.2) 203, 414, 646, 647, 662 guṇamātrā 112 guṇopasañcaya 111 guru 112, 172, 186-191, 198, 199, 231, 642, 658, 666 gurutā 172 gurutva 112, 189, 198, 658 gosani 369, 370 grah 203 graha 78, 650 grahaṇa 166, 177, 209, 223, 294, 311, 316, 372, 379, 649 glapi 597, 598 glah 203 gh 39, 41, 50, 53, 56, 116-118, 245, 251, 349, 640 gh̐ 118, 119, 139, 251 gha 111, 112, 119, 129, 130, 640 ghoṣa 34, 40-42, 44, 58, 59, 111, 113, 114, 116, 117, 119, 246, 263-266, 274, 275, 288-291, 305, 306, 309, 316, 321, 639, 640, 668, 669, 672, 676, 677, 679, 681, 684 ghoṣatā 58 ghoṣanādabhāgin 640 ghoṣavat 34, 40, 42, 44, 58, 69, 116, 118, 119, 263, 264, 274, 275, 309, 321, 668, 672, 679, 681, 684, 685 ghoṣin 40, 58, 111 ṅ 39, 73, 105, 113, 116, 138, 175, 179, 180, 182, 271, 273, 284, 296, 349, 396, 636, 640, 648, 670, 671, 673 ṅa 84, 104, 113, 119, 129, 130, 139, 179-181, 183, 251, 271, 272, 284, 396, 397, 636, 640, 648, 670, 673 ṅakāra 670 ṅatva 251 ṅaM 397 ṅaMUṬ 397 ṅit 664 ṅidanta 664 c 33, 39, 40, 41, 56, 105, 131, 274, 277, 278, 281, 289, 290, 301, 303, 305, 451, 474, 636, 637, 640, 653, 672, 677, 679 c̐ 253 ca 73, 76, 104, 105, 112, 117, 125, 131, 132, 145, 250, 274, 275, 277, 278, 290, 291, 303, 306, 451, 474, 636, 637, 640, 653, 672, 677, 679 ca (‘and’) 100, 104, 107, 147, 149, 176, 180, 189, 190, 194, 195, 198, 201, 208, 210, 215, 216, 219, 220, 225, 227, 236- 238, 258, 265, 266, 277, 286, 299, 301, 309, 316, 321, 335,

746 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS 337, 339, 341, 345, 358, 362, 366, 369, 371, 388, 399, 401, 404, 405, 416, 417, 423, 424, 435, 443, 446, 464, 469, 474, 482, 485, 487-489, 491, 503, 507, 508, 517, 521, 523, 526, 531, 532, 539, 541, 548, 550, 555, 562, 564, 586, 590, 605, 613, 623, 624, 628, 637, 638, 642, 648, 651, 654, 655, 659, 660-667, 669, 675-677, 681- 686 cakra 375 catur 98 caturtha 41, 72, 99, 110-112, 116, 119, 245, 253, 255-257, 259, 269, 278, 615, 637, 655, 670, 671, 676 caturthavarṇa 670 caturthī 634 caturthyartha 634 caturmātra 199 catūrātra 584, 585 caY 269, 671 caR 203 carcā 249, 476, 573-577, 581, 582, 618, 620, 625, 626 carcāpada 574 cartva 672 cal 203 cavarga 40, 72, 74, 105, 131, 132, 250, 274, 275, 277, 278, 290, 291, 303, 306, 451, 474, 637, 653, 672, 677, 679 cavargīya 274, 275, 278, 672 cāritārthya 642 cu 250, 278, 636 cutva 250 cet 301, 302, 537 cyāvayati 595, 596 cch 281 ch 39, 40, 41, 56. 274, 280-282, 305, 399, 640, 671-673, 679 ch̐ 254 cha 105, 111, 112, 117, 131, 132, 274, 280, 281, 327, 399, 640, 671-673, 679 cha (affix) 130 chakāra 11, 274, 280, 281, 327, 399, 671-673 chatravat 646 chandas 71, 189, 328, 329, 352, 384, 455, 467, 478, 524, 533, 534, 591, 629, 685 chaV 291, 677 chāndasa 524, 533, 534 j 39, 40, 41, 274, 640 j̐ 253 ja 105, 112, 119, 131, 132, 250, 640 jakāra 250 jaṭā 311, 577, 578, 615, 622, 627 jaṭāpāṭha 311, 577, 578, 615, 622, 627 jani 524 japana 171, 172 jara jarat 553, 554 jaratparvan 553 jaŚ 264, 265 jahāti 312, 313, 684 jāgāra 601 jāta 98, 634, 649, 687 jāti 640, 658 jātīya 66, 526, 527 jātīyaR 527 jātīyādi 526, 527

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ747 jātya 122, 124, 423, 424, 429-431, 437-440 jātyasvara 430 jāspatya 564, 565, 587, 588 jihvā 39, 41-43, 57, 72, 129-135, 582, 636, 640, 640, 679 jihvāgra 76, 132-136, 636 jihvāpārśva 135 jihvāmadhyadeśa 132 jihvāmadhyabhāga 636 jihvāmūla 43, 72, 129, 130, 139, 305, 307, 582, 636, 640, 648, 679 jihvāmūlanāsika 139 jihvāmūlasthāna 129 jihvāmūlīya 39, 41, 42, 57, 72, 111, 117, 129, 130, 133, 168, 169, 305, 307, 582, 636, 640, 648, 679 jihvya 130, 131 jīva 343, 684 jīvantīm oṣadhīm 378, 379 jīhīḍāham 385, 593 jj 401 jñāna 610, 612 jñāpaka 112, 677 jyotis 608 jyotiṣṭva 607, 608 jh 39, 40, 41, 44, 118, 274, 281, 640 jha 105, 111, 112, 119, 131, 132, 640 jhaY 269, 670, 671 jhaR 672 jhaL 208, 264, 265, 299, 454, 470, 675 jhaŚ 264 ñ 39, 40, 41, 43, 49, 105, 113, 138, 175, 274, 280, 296, 636, 640, 671, 672 ña 104, 105, 113, 119, 131, 132, 139, 250, 274, 275, 636, 640, 671, 672 ñakāra 250, 274, 275, 671, 672 ñatva 250 ñch 272, 281 ṭ 33, 39, 40, 41, 56, 63, 270, 271, 273, 275, 277, 278, 284, 290, 301-303, 305, 451, 474, 636, 640, 649, 653, 670-672, 677, 679, 680 ṭ̐ 253 ṭa 73, 76, 104, 112, 117, 125, 133, 145, 181, 270-272, 275, 277, 278, 284, 290, 291, 303, 306, 326, 451, 474, 640, 649, 653, 670-672, 677, 679, 680 ṭakāra 76, 143, 270, 670 ṭavarga 40, 72, 73, 76, 78, 133, 148, 275, 277, 278, 290, 291, 303, 306, 326, 451, 474, 649, 653, 672, 677, 679 ṭavargīya 275, 326, 672 Ṭā 70, 84, 509 ṭi 212, 648, 656, 657, 665 ṭilopa 656, 657 ṭit 649 ṭU 63, 72, 74, 78, 99, 102, 278, 307, 327, 573, 574, 636 ṭUK 271, 671 ṭutva 99, 573, 574 ṭh 39, 40, 41, 56, 305, 640, 671, 680 ṭha 76, 111, 112, 117, 133, 640, 671, 680

748 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS ḍ 39, 40, 41, 56, 145, 201, 271, 276, 326, 418, 640, 653, 670, 682 ḍa 76, 112, 119, 133, 134, 145, 202, 640, 653, 670, 682 ḍakāra 653, 682 ḌatamaC 516 ḌataraC 516 ḍatva 202 ḍalayor abhedaḥ 653 ḌāvatU 547 ḍh 39, 40, 41, 44, 56, 99, 118, 145, 278, 279, 283, 639 ḍha 72, 76, 99, 111, 112, 119, 133, 134, 145, 278, 279, 283, 639 ḍhatva 99, 278, 639 ṇ 36, 39, 40, 41, 43, 50, 105, 113, 138, 175, 179, 180, 271, 273, 275, 284, 296, 316, 331, 396, 397, 451-454, 456-458, 460, 462, 463, 465-475, 546, 572- 574, 581, 583, 600, 602-604, 634, 636, 640, 648, 653, 658, 670-673 ṇa 76, 84, 104, 113, 119, 133, 139, 179-181, 183, 271, 272, 275, 284, 331, 368, 396, 397, 451, 452, 454, 456-458, 466- 468, 470-475, 572-574, 581, 634, 636, 640, 648, 653, 658, 670, 672, 673 ṇakāra 36, 275, 451, 452, 454, 456-458, 466, 468, 470-475, 670, 672 ṇatva 467, 471, 572-574, 581, 634, 653, 658 ṇatvavidhāna 658 ṆiC 596 ṇijanta 596 ṇopadeśa 331, 453, 456 t 33, 39, 40, 41, 56, 135, 181, 184, 251, 252, 269, 270-273, 276- 280, 282, 284, 290, 295, 301, 302, 305, 327, 350, 351, 382, 399, 407, 451, 474, 546, 560- 562, 574, 640, 653, 670-672, 677, 680, 682 t̐ 253 ta 76, 84, 104, 112, 117, 125, 135, 145, 181, 250, 270-272, 274, 276-281, 284, 290, 291, 296, 297, 306, 326-328, 350-352, 383, 451, 474, 546, 561, 562, 640, 653, 670-672, 677, 680, 682 takāra 68, 73, 74, 76, 93, 143, 270, 276, 277, 290, 327, 328, 350- 352, 383, 546, 562, 670, 672, 677, 682 takārādi 350-352, 383, 562 takārānta 93 takārottara 670 tataḥ 154, 638 tatas pari 335, 683 tad 257, 258, 269, 278, 303, 352, 353, 402, 437, 439, 534, 535, 547, 615, 627, 652, 667, 670, 672, 679 taddhita 68, 74, 239, 350, 351, 454, 480, 512, 513, 517, 518, 524-526, 543, 556, 566 tanmānin 527, 528 tama 514-516, 525, 543, 544, 561, 644, 647, 654 tara 514-516, 525, 543, 644, 654 tarkabuddhi 629 talopa 561

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ749 tavarga 40, 73, 135, 148, 250, 274, 278-281, 291, 295, 297, 306, 326, 451, 474, 653, 672, 677 tavargīya 274, 278-281, 326, 672 tātiL 68, 519, 525 tāthābhāvya 123 tā3d 259, 667 tādi 350, 351 tān agre 352, 353 tāna 611 tānasvara 611 tālavya 71, 131, 132, 144, 277, 636 tālu 39, 43, 72, 128, 131, 132, 139, 141, 142, 144, 277, 303, 635, 636 tālunāsika 139, 141, 142 tālusthāna 131 tiṄ 482, 647, 649, 666 tiṅanta 219, 482, 647 tiṅākāṅkṣa 666 tirovirāma 122 tīkṣṇa 423, 424 tīvra 423 tU 278, 636 tUK 272, 399 tulya 126, 635, 638, 641, 644, 645 tulyatā tulyaliṅga 112 tulyavr̥tti 425 tulyāsyaprayatna 70, 141, 146, 156, 276, 412, 635, 638, 645 tuviṣṭama 476, 560 tūṣṇīmbhāva 115 tr̥tīya 41, 69, 88, 93, 106, 108, 110-112, 119, 171, 245, 253, 263, 264, 266, 388, 389, 615, 637, 651, 668-670 tr̥tīyavarṇa 668, 669 tr̥tīyavarṇānta 668 tr̥tīyā 509, 660 tr̥tīyānta 88, 93, 106, 171, 266, 388, 389, 637, 651, 668 tr̥tīyāsamāsa 660 tairovirāma 435 tairovyañjana 122, 423-425, 428, 435-438, 441 tais tvam 351, 352 tt 401 tyam 392 trā 531 tri 86, 194, 199, 200, 332, 333, 402, 603, 604, 618, 642, 643, 656, 667 tridhātu 86, 332, 333 tripada 603, 604, 618, 619 tripadakrama 619 tripadamadhyāvayava 618 triprabhr̥ti 402 trimātra 199, 200, 642, 643, 656 trividha 667 trisaṃyoga 194 tredhā 566 traiṣṭubha 587 traisvarya 611 traihāyaṇa 587 tva 523, 524 tve 220, 664 ts 184, 282 th 39, 40, 41, 56, 184, 279, 280, 305, 640, 671, 672, 680 th̐ 253 tha 111, 112, 117, 135, 640, 671, 672, 680 thakāra 672 thā 513, 514

750 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS d 39, 40, 41, 201, 269, 302, 326, 569, 640, 653, 657, 669, 670, 682 da 112, 119, 135, 202, 250, 640, 653, 657, 669, 670, 682 daṃṣṭra 375 dakāra 250, 653, 669, 670 dakāranipātana 669, 670 datva 657 dadāti 383, 562 dadhāti 564 danta 43, 72, 135, 139, 142-144, 156, 425, 636, 646, 653 dantanāsika 139, 142 dantapaṅkti 156 dantamūla 43, 72, 75, 76, 135, 136, 142-144, 425, 636, 653 dantamūlasthāna 143 dantamūlasparśin 135, 136 dantamūlīya 57, 63, 72, 102, 135, 144 dantasthāna 135, 141 dantāgra 76, 137 dantoṣṭhanāsika 142 dantauṣṭhya 137, 138 dantya 55, 135, 136, 141, 276, 636, 636, 653 dantyo(/au)ṣṭhya 55, 75, 76, 78, 137, 636 dantoṣṭhyatā 137 darśana 525, 572, 573 daśa 201, 202 dā 382, 383 dādhāra 601 dān 85, 89, 234, 234 dānīm 521, 522 dārḍhya 612, 632 dāśa 201, 202 divaḥ 337, 683 divi 366, 367 diś 571 dīdāya 390, 594 dīrgha 43, 50, 63, 67, 68, 71, 72, 74, 75, 78, 88, 99, 102, 121, 124, 141, 158, 159, 160, 174, 186-188, 197-200, 214, 215, 231, 232, 233-239, 242-244, 278, 283, 326, 374-376, 378- 382, 384-392, 412, 449, 531, 532, 538, 548-550, 449, 572- 574, 584, 589, 594, 597, 617, 618, 622, 623, 629, 639, 641- 643, 646, 653, 655-659, 661, 663, 667, 673, 681, 682, 685, 686 dīrghatā 214, 215, 233 dīrghatva 548-550, 572, 589, 594, 597, 618, 622, 623, 655, 658 dīrghatvasamāpatti 597 dīrghaplutavyavadhāna 659 dīrghasaṃśaya 538, 559 dīrghasvarita 124 dīrghābhāva 658 dīrghāyutva 324, 325, 605, 682, 686 dīrghībhāva 574 dīrghopadha 661 duḥ 326, 330, 682 duḥspr̥ṣṭa 162 durṇāman 466 duṣṭatā 686 duṣṭara 587 dūrād āhvāna 665 dūrāddhūta 665 dr̥ḍha 422, 423 dr̥ḍhatara 422 dr̥bdha 640 dr̥śi 569

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ751 devatā 548, 549 devatādvandva 548, 549 dairghya 653, 656, 663 dyubh(i) 520, 525 dyauḥ 341, 684 dravya 479, 647 dravyapradhāna 479 dravyārthādeśa 647 drāghita 215 drughaṇa 452 druta 46, 197 droṇikā 134, 135, 156, 636 dvandva 548-550 dvār 312, 684 dvi 39, 54, 56, 68, 111, 112, 128, 152, 153, 159, 194, 196, 198, 199, 218, 223, 250, 313, 314, 395, 403, 450, 613, 642, 643, 648, 651-653, 664, 665, 673, 685 dviḥ 394, 397-399, 401-403, 651- 653, 672-674 dvitīya 41, 84, 110-112, 117, 245, 268, 390, 391, 615, 623, 626, 637, 652, 658, 669-671, 676 dvitīyavarṇa 669, 676 dvitīyā 232, 235, 253, 457, 634, 664 dvitva 111, 112, 196, 250, 651- 653, 673, 676 dvitvavikalpa 652 dvitvaniṣedha 651 dvitvapratiṣedha 652 dvidha 652 dvidhā 675 dvipada 613 dvimātra 159, 198, 199, 642, 643, 658 dvimātraka 199 dvimātrika 159 dviya 652 dvirukta 541, 542 dvirukti 652 dvirbhāva 196 dvirvacana 395, 539, 577, 620, 621, 626, 628 dvirvacanavr̥tti 539 dvivacana 68, 218, 219, 223, 313, 314, 648, 664, 665, 685 dvivacanānta 68, 218, 219, 223, 313, 314, 664, 665, 685 dvivarṇa 39, 54, 56, 152, 153 dvivyañjanasandhi 111 dvisaṃyoga 194 dvisthāna 128 dvisvarībhāva 243, 450 dvailiṅgya 112 dvyakṣara 565 dh 39, 40, 41, 44, 56, 118, 245, 271, 640, 652 dh̐ 253 dha 111, 112, 119, 135, 640, 652 dhakāra 652 dharma 607, 609, 635, 641, 643, 644, 658, 680, 685 dharmaśeṣa 610 dharmin 685 dhā 512 dhātu 11, 68, 203, 204, 223, 234, 235, 250, 357, 358, 417, 418, 453, 456, 457, 460, 461, 463, 468, 470, 479, 533, 562, 647, 648, 659, 660-662, 675, 678, 686 dhātunakāra 457 dhāturūpa 675 dhātustha 460, 461, 463 dhātvanta 533

752 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS dhātvartha 647 dhātvartharañjaka 647 dhātvādi 417, 659, 660 dhātvekadeśalopa 562 dhīḥ 392 dhUṬ 271, 670 dhaivata 423 dhvani 114, 115 n 39, 40, 41, 43, 113, 138, 175, 179-182, 207-209, 252, 271- 275, 280, 281, 284, 290-292, 295-297, 299, 300, 316, 356, 368, 396, 407, 408, 451-459, 461-466, 468-475, 534, 546, 572, 573, 581, 583, 600, 602, 604, 636, 640, 648, 653, 670- 675, 677, 678 nh 254 na 84, 104, 113, 119, 135, 139, 179, 180, 183, 207, 208, 210, 250, 251, 271, 272, 274, 275, 278, 284, 290, 291, 293-295, 297-300, 356, 357, 388, 396, 397, 407, 451, 452, 454, 456- 458, 464, 466, 468, 470-475, 636, 640, 648, 653, 670-675, 677, 678 na (negation) 13, 34, 52, 57, 61, 63, 68, 71, 78, 86, 88, 91, 93, 102, 106, 107, 112, 146, 148, 149, 151, 154, 163, 165, 185, 186, 188, 189, 202-205, 209, 224, 236, 249, 250, 286, 287, 295, 300, 301, 303, 317, 318, 324, 325, 333, 368-371, 381, 382, 385, 387, 389, 395, 401- 403, 444, 450, 462, 468, 470- 475, 479, 488-490, 512, 514, 523, 531-536, 547, 548, 551- 553, 556-559, 561-566, 568, 570, 571, 589, 591, 599, 600- 605, 608, 610, 614, 616, 618, 620, 626, 627, 629, 637, 639- 641, 645, 646, 649-661, 664, 665, 667, 668, 673, 675, 676- 680, 682, 685, 686 nakāra 73, 93, 207, 208, 210, 250, 251, 274, 275, 278, 290, 291, 293-295, 297-300, 407, 451, 452, 454, 456-458, 464, 466, 468, 470-474, 653, 670-672, 674, 675, 677, 678 nakārānta 677, 678 nakṣatra 608 naÑ 244, 331, 681, 685 nañsamāsa 244, 685 nadī 432, 433 napara 674 napuṃsaka 78, 93, 231, 232, 299, 317, 454, 641, 659, 685 napuṃsakabahuvacana 641 napuṃsakaliṅga 232, 641 nara 381 nalopa 356 navati 464 naśi 471 nāda 44, 58, 59, 114, 116-120, 171-175, 264, 639, 640 nādadhvanisaṃsarga 114 nādaprayatnaka 174 nādabhāgin 640 nādānupradāna 119 nānāpada 65, 279, 453, 456, 457, 468, 470, 525, 583, 628, 672 nānāpadadarśana 525 nāman 98, 226, 466, 478-480, 482, 484, 488-490, 527, 528,

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ753 627, 632, 634, 640, 645, 648, 649, 656, 687 nāmasvarūpa 656 nāmākhyātopasarganipāta 634, 687 nāmikarepha 354 nāmin 69, 73, 74, 241, 246, 294, 295, 308, 309, 348-350, 352- 355, 357, 359, 365, 382-384, 410, 432, 433, 618, 636, 645, 650, 651, 658, 677, 678, 681- 683, 686 nāmisvara 636 nāmyanta nāmyupadha 74, 241, 294, 295, 308, 309, 348-350, 352-354, 658, 677, 678, 681-683 nāraka 390, 595 nārṣada 587 nāśa 686 nāsikā 43, 55, 113, 125, 138-142, 254, 636 nāsikāsthāna 139, 141 nāsikya 42, 113, 125, 138-141, 254, 255, 636 niḥ 330, 682 nigama 221, 634 nigr̥hya 666 nigr̥hyānuyoga 666 nighāta 437, 439, 611, 614 nitya 163, 201, 202, 209, 226, 397, 428, 548, 623, 646, 683 nityatva 209 nityasaṃhita 163, 226 nidhana 609 nipāta 11, 64, 98, 223-226, 319, 462, 463, 478, 479, 484, 496, 497, 634, 639, 641, 647-649, 664, 678, 682, 687 nipātaja 682 nipātana 639, 653, 669, 670, 680 nipātavat 639 nipātādhikāra 641 nipātānta 226, 379, 521 nipātopasargavarjita 649 nimitta 112, 357, 359, 360, 395, 452, 454, 455, 457, 578, 579, 582, 627, 629 niyoga 661 nirāsa 651 nirdiṣṭa 649, 664 nirdeśa 476 nirvāpa 609 nirvikalpaka 632 nivatas pr̥ṇāti 344, 345, 684 nivāraṇa 111 nivr̥tti 453, 620 niścaya 661 niṣāda 423 niṣiddha 177 niṣiddhāvagraha 177 niṣedha 549, 639, 646, 651 niṣṭhā 379 nīca 123 nīcaiḥ 11, 74, 120, 121, 483, 643 nUM 68, 299, 356, 357, 451, 454- 456, 474 naimittika 627, 629 nts 282 nn 401 nyāya 432, 433 nś 272, 281 ns 282 p 33, 39, 42, 56, 169, 301, 305, 307, 328, 330, 331, 338, 342, 573, 574, 636, 640, 677, 679, 680, 682, 683 p̐ 253

754 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS pa 76, 91, 104, 112, 117, 125, 136, 137, 145, 307, 328, 348, 640, 677, 679, 680, 682, 683 pakṣa 375 pañca 615 pañcajana 609 pañcapadī 68, 69, 235-239, 378, 431-433 pañcama 111, 113, 119, 139, 253, 423, 636, 637, 668, 669, 674 pañcamavarṇa 668, 669 pañcamī 78, 335, 336, 649, 683 pañcavarga 112 paṇati 602 patāti 684 pathi 366 pada 33, 63, 69, 73, 98, 99, 102- 108, 139, 146, 147, 163, 168, 172, 176, 177, 182, 183, 188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 198, 202, 208, 210, 212, 215-222, 226- 231, 248-251, 253, 263-270, 277, 279, 282, 285, 286, 296- 301, 310, 311, 314, 316, 319, 320, 322-329, 331, 339, 349, 353-356, 358, 360, 361, 364, 365, 368, 371, 374, 375, 378, 380, 382, 383, 386, 391, 393, 394, 396, 397, 399, 409, 410, 413-415, 419, 420, 426, 430, 431, 442, 443, 445, 446, 450- 457, 462, 465-468, 470, 472, 475, 476, 478, 480-484, 486- 490, 494, 495, 499, 502, 503, 505-507, 509-511, 514-521, 523-537, 539-543, 546-553, 556-558, 561-588, 590-596, 598-605, 610-616, 618, 619, 624-629, 631, 632, 634, 635, 641, 642, 644, 647-651, 653, 656, 657, 660, 661, 663, 665, 668, 669, 671-678, 680-683, 685, 687 padakāla 163, 215, 217, 230, 467, 577, 613, 626 padagrahaṇa 316 padajāta 98, 634, 649, 687 padatva 511, 515, 523-525, 533- 535 padadvayapūrva 212 padapāṭha 37, 60, 65, 66, 67, 81, 82, 93, 98, 99, 177, 195, 201, 212, 215-222, 226-230, 248, 249, 263-266, 269, 270, 282, 286, 299, 300, 310, 311, 314, 316, 319, 322-329, 331, 349, 353-355, 358, 360, 361, 371, 374, 375, 378, 380, 382, 386, 391, 393, 396, 409, 413-415, 419, 430, 442, 443, 445, 446, 450, 452, 453, 455, 462, 465- 467, 470, 476, 478, 480-484, 486-488, 490, 494, 495, 499, 503, 505-507, 509, 510, 514- 521, 523-537, 539-543, 546- 553, 556-558, 561-588, 590- 592, 594-596, 598-602, 604, 605, 610-616, 618, 619, 624- 628, 634, 635 padapūraṇa 647 padaprakr̥ti 37, 98, 634, 635 padamadhya 644, 677, 682 padavat 577 padavidhi 489, 502 padavibhāga 612 padavyavāya 475 padaśaḥ 611 padaśāstra 625

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ755 padasamāmnāya 634 padādi 73, 177, 182, 202, 250, 320, 327, 420, 426, 533, 534, 656, 661, 663, 681, 683 padādisparśa 177 padādya 391, 556 padādhyayana 610-612 padādhyāyin 611, 612 padānta 69, 73, 102, 106, 145, 146, 148, 158, 163, 172, 176, 177, 182, 183, 188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 198, 202, 208, 210, 263-269, 285, 349, 394, 397, 399, 426, 450, 470, 506, 585, 615, 642, 644, 647, 648, 650, 657, 660, 661, 663, 665, 668- 676, 678, 680, 685 padāntagrahaṇa 177 padāntanakāra 678 padāntavikr̥ta 585, 615 padāntavirāma 146 padāntasandhi 163, 177, 193 padāntasparśa 177, 615 padāntābhāva 657 padāntya 102 padābhyantara 665, 675 padya 88, 94, 98, 99, 102-107, 109, 194, 198, 244, 278, 413, 418, 615, 637, 642, 647, 649, 687 paniṣpadā 601 para 68-70, 72, 78, 99, 112, 139, 165, 172, 173, 177-180, 184- 186, 188, 191-196, 198, 208, 210, 213, 217, 228, 229, 239, 255, 256, 259, 276-278, 288- 291, 296, 305, 306, 316, 326, 327, 335, 343, 371, 372, 392, 402, 403, 408, 411-415, 419, 425, 428-431, 441, 443, 444, 446, 453, 454, 461, 471, 482- 484, 486, 487, 489, 507-511, 524, 542, 547, 549, 582, 615, 616, 621, 624, 637, 642, 646, 650, 652-657, 659-663, 665, 667-682, 685 paracaturthatva 72, 99, 278 parataḥ 74, 176, 178, 180, 202, 210, 214, 234, 235, 245, 249, 253, 264, 268, 270, 272, 274, 275, 277, 283, 284, 296, 297, 300, 301, 308, 309, 318, 320, 321, 326, 328, 337-345, 350, 354, 374-376, 381-383, 386, 387, 392, 397-399, 410-412, 414, 415, 418, 426, 427, 432, 434, 445, 447, 511, 512, 517- 519, 522, 523, 527, 529-533, 538, 540, 544, 563, 570, 596, 652, 660, 661, 675 paratva 661 parama 361 pararūpa 413, 415, 419, 657, 661, 662 paravarja 338, 392 parasannikarṣaṇa 646 parasaṃyoga 654 parasaṃyojana 653 parasavarṇa 276, 408, 471 parasasthāna 69, 73, 246, 276, 277, 296, 305, 306, 327, 672, 673, 679, 682 parasmaibhāṣā 629 parā 457, 458 parāṅga 198 parāśraya 644 pari 371, 470, 559 parigraha 621

756 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS paridhiṣ patāti 344, 684 paripāṭha 259, 667 paribhāṣaṇa 635 paribhāṣā 635, 640, 649, 650 pariveṣṭita 636 parihartavya 623, 624 parihāra 123, 212, 310, 311, 313, 316, 317, 319, 326, 476, 573- 577, 581-583, 605, 616, 619- 628 parihārakāla 623, 624 parihārya 620, 621, 622, 628, 629 parīkṣā 640 parokṣā 71, 588, 589 paroṣmāpatti 210 parṇa 375 paryudāsa 161, 395 parvan 508, 509, 541, 542, 553, 580, 581 pavarga 40, 136, 137, 307, 683 pāṃsu 232, 233 pākāra 677, 678 pākṣika 672 pāda 159, 189, 190, 242, 335, 352, 420, 421, 436-438, 449, 551, 610, 675, 676, 680, 686 pādapūraṇa 686 pādapūraṇābhāva 686 pādam aṅgurim 205-207, 653 pādamātrā 159, 680 pādamātrika 680 pādavivr̥tta 436 pādavivr̥tti 436 pādavr̥tta 122, 423-425, 436-438, 441 pādavaivr̥tta 436 pādānta 189, 190, 675, 676 pārśvabindudvaya 648 pitar 340, 341, 683 pibati 524 pīḍana 145 pīḍita 171-173, 640 pU 451, 456, 474, 636, 677, 682, 685 puṃliṅga 645 puṃśca 288-290, 676 puṃs 93, 146, 238, 239, 288, 289, 317, 676 punar 315, 609, 619, 627, 685 punargrahaṇa 209 punar ṇayāmasi 463 puras 201, 202 puruṣa ā babhūvā̃3 211-213 pūraṇa 536, 647 pūrṇa 112, 644, 655 pūrṇa akāra 655 pūrṇatvābhāva 655 pūrṇākṣara 644 pūryāṇa 565, 566 pūrva 68-70, 73, 78, 84, 112, 158, 159, 164, 165, 181, 184, 185, 192-196, 207-212, 241, 244, 245, 251, 253, 256-259, 269, 278, 279, 283, 297, 298, 301, 302, 320, 331, 356, 361, 364, 365, 397, 399, 403, 407-409, 411, 412, 414, 420, 422, 425, 428-430, 448, 452-455, 472, 473, 481, 483, 486, 487, 489, 502, 505, 507, 510-512, 524, 525, 533-535, 540, 543, 578, 579, 583, 611, 624, 637, 639, 642, 646, 648-650, 653, 656- 659, 661, 663, 666, 670-675, 677, 678, 681, 682, 685, 686 pūrvacaturtha 269, 670, 671

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ757 pūrvapada 158, 202, 356, 361, 364, 365, 452-455, 540, 578, 579, 583, 611 pūrvapadanimitta 578, 579 pūrvapadaprakr̥tisvaratva 540 pūrvapadastha 452, 454, 455 pūrvapadādhikāra 453 pūrvapadānta 158, 193, 202 pūrvapadāntavyañjana 193 pūrvapara 411, 412, 656, 661, 681 pūrvapūrvasvara 259 pūrvabādha 637 pūrvarūpa 70, 184, 185, 448, 663, 681 pūrvavat 653, 654, 672, 677 pūrvaśāstra 64, 629 pūrvasadr̥śa 637 pūrvasasthāna 278, 279, 672 pūrvasasvara 256 pūrvasvara 194, 208, 258, 259, 666, 674, 685 pūrvākṣara 658 pūrvāṅga 185, 196, 244 pūrvārdha 121 pūrvottara 181 pr̥kta 41, 111, 223-225, 616-618, 623, 641, 663, 664 pr̥ṇāti 684 pr̥thak 112, 151, 168, 541, 542, 670 pr̥thak-iṅgya-samāsa 541, 542 pr̥thakkaraṇa 667 pr̥thaktva 112, 151 pr̥thakpada 168 pr̥thaksattva 112 pr̥ṣodaratva 657 pr̥ṣṭaprativacana 666 pp 401 pra 343, 457, 458, 684 prakāra 205, 213, 379 prakr̥ti 68, 114, 116, 117, 296, 297, 404, 406, 407, 420, 421, 479-483, 486, 487, 540, 550, 572, 573, 581, 634, 635, 641, 663, 665, 667, 670, 680, 681, 684 prakr̥tidarśana 572, 573 prakr̥tipratyayasamudāya 670 prakr̥tibhāva 641, 660, 663, 667 prakr̥tibhūta 635 prakr̥tisvara 64, 479, 480-483, 486, 487, 540 prakriyā 78, 638, 639, 645 prakriyākāla 645 prakriyādaśā 78, 638 pragr̥hya 68, 164, 212, 214-218, 220-230, 404, 574, 575, 577, 613, 620-623, 625, 626, 641, 648, 663-665, 667 pragr̥hyatā 229 pragr̥hyatva 577, 626, 641, 663 pragr̥hyaprakr̥ti 665 pragr̥hyasandhi 663 pragr̥hyāvagr̥hya 577, 613, 626 pragr̥hyāśraya 667 praṇava 633, 666 pratijñā 256, 438, 641, 668 pratijñāna 88, 93, 98, 99, 106, 107, 110, 266, 637, 668 pratijñānunāsikya 641 pratiyatna 676 prativeṣṭana 134 prativeṣṭita 76, 132-134 pratiśravaṇa 666 pratiṣiddha 557 pratiṣedha 204, 395, 405, 515, 549, 554, 616, 652 pratiṣṭhita

758 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS pratihata 423 pratyañcā3m 259, 667 pratyabhivāda 666 pratyaya 69, 70, 130, 168, 169, 185, 221, 224, 234, 235, 237, 354-357, 359, 376, 479, 512, 514, 514, 596, 640, 641, 646, 648, 654, 655, 670, 680, 685 pratyayavyañjana 654 pratyayasakāra 354-356, 359 pratyayānta 221, 235, 237 pratyāpati 572 pratyāhāra 51 prathama 41, 88, 93, 104, 106- 108, 111-113, 117, 141, 171, 212, 245, 253, 263, 266, 390, 408, 409, 498, 592, 595, 637, 652, 656, 668-671 prathamapadya 94, 498 prathamavarṇa 669 prathamā 221, 232, 235, 378, 685 prathamānta 88, 93, 106, 171, 266, 637, 668 prathamaikavacana 212, 685 prathamaikavacanānta 212 pradeśa 655 prapaṇa 602 prabhr̥ti 388, 402, 590 pramāṇa 668 prayatna 43, 44, 51, 57, 58, 70, 76-78, 109, 112, 116, 117, 119, 125, 126, 133, 140, 141, 145- 148, 150-152, 155, 156, 173, 174, 276, 285, 287, 412, 635- 640, 645, 646, 652 prayatnabhda 57 prayoga 78, 203, 638, 659, 665 prayogārha 203 prayojana 83, 97, 102, 187, 217, 230, 241, 610, 617, 618, 622, 637, 642 pravr̥tti 686 praśna 641, 665-667 praśnānta 641, 666 praśliṣṭa 153, 160, 163, 423, 424, 639 praśliṣṭāvarṇa 153, 163 praśleṣa 157, 429, 639 prasakta 616 prasaṅga 395, 687 prasajyapratiṣedha 395 prasandhāna 582, 615, 624, 625 prasāraṇa 535, 536 prastīrṇa 135, 636 prākr̥tadhvani 46 prākśliṣṭa 122, 424, 427, 437 prāṇa 34, 36, 44, 637, 672 prāṇati, prāṇanti 558, 559 prātar 315, 685 prātijña 62, 72, 98-101, 649, 686, 687 prātipadika 68, 454-456, 479, 648, 649 prātipadikānta 454-456 prāpta 101, 102, 190, 221, 250, 533, 637, 651-654 prāpti 111, 651 prāśī3ḥ 259, 667 prāśliṣṭa 122, 423, 424, 427-429, 437-440 pretya 607 prepsu 527-529 preraṇa 666 preṣaṇa 666 pluta 10, 43, 75, 121, 124, 159, 161, 164, 165, 187, 188, 197, 199, 200, 212, 213, 244, 247-

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ759 249, 259, 260, 504, 505, 623- 625, 629, 639, 641-643, 646, 656, 659, 663, 665, 667 plutakārya 656 plutatā 200 plutatva 212 plutavat 667 plutasandhi 663, 667 plutasvara 187, 504, 505 plutasvarita 124 plutānunāsika 213 pluti 11, 247, 259, 667 ph 39, 42, 56, 169, 305, 307, 640, 680 pha 111, 112, 117, 136, 137, 640, 680 phyakāra 194 b 39, 56, 138, 302, 640, 651 ba 112, 119, 136, 137, 640, 651 bakāra 651 babhūva 504, also see: ā babhūvā̃3 barhiḥ 366, 367 bala 34, 36, 37, 646, 655, 670 balavat 653 balābala 424 balīyas 646, 665 bahiraṅga 78, 649 bahula 71, 352, 380, 381, 382, 384, 386-389, 461, 533, 534, 567, 589, 591, 629, 677, 686 bahulagrahaṇa 380, 381 bahulādhikāra 677 bahuvacana 68, 76, 143, 221-223, 231, 232, 641, 664 bahuvacanagrahaṇa 223 bahuvacanānta 221, 223 bahusaṃyoga 198 bādha 637 bāhulaka 686 bāhyaprayatna 58, 78, 116-118, 120, 636, 639, 640 bindu 648 bodhana 641 bodhapratībodhau 601 brahma 335, 683 brahmaṇvat 604 brahmayajña 611 bh 39, 56, 104, 118, 640, 651, 652 bh̐ 253 bha 111, 112, 119, 136, 137, 189, 640, 651, 652 bhakāra 189, 651, 652 bhatva 193 bhartsana 666 bhavati 330, 679 bhānu 469 bhāle puṇḍravat 646 bhāva 479, 647, 663, 667, 672, 677, 680, 681 bhāvapradhāna 479 bhāvya 122, 123 bhāvyamāna 649 bhāṣā 666 bhiḥ 530, 531 bhinnapadathatva 627, 629 bhugna 680 bhuvaḥ 318, 319, 685 bhūta 348, 417, 418, 533 bhūtakaraṇa 69, 417, 418 bhūyā3ḥ 259, 667 bhūvādi 647 bhūṣaṇa 677 bheda 639, 641, 644, 661, 662 bhedaka 45 bhyaḥ bhyām 530, 531

760 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS m 39, 113, 138, 175, 207-209, 251, 252, 254, 288, 296-301, 322, 387, 407, 408, 507, 546, 633, 636, 637, 640, 669, 673- 676 mh 254 ma 76, 78, 104, 106, 113, 119, 136, 137, 139, 176, 188, 207, 208, 210, 241, 242, 246, 288, 289, 296-298, 300, 301, 407, 507, 633, 636, 637, 640, 669, 673-676 makāra 188, 207, 208, 210, 241, 246, 288, 289, 296-298, 300, 301, 407, 507, 633, 673-676 makāropadha 241 maṇḍala 423 mata 106 matabheda 106 matU 68, 71, 242, 387, 507, 517, 525, 526, 546, 669 matUP 71, 242, 507, 517, 525, 526, 546 matvartha 68, 238, 507, 546 madhya 76, 113, 116, 131, 132, 134, 143, 197, 244, 253, 486, 562, 616-618, 620, 636, 644, 651, 653, 677, 682 madhyajihva 131, 132, 636 madhyadeśa 76 madhyabhāva 618 madhyama 46, 540-542, 617 madhyasthāna 76, 143 madhyodātta 244 manas pāpa 345, 684 manuṣyat 565, 566 mantra 610, 611 mantraprayoga 611 mantrārthajñāna 610 mapara 674 maya 71, 522, 525, 526 mayaṬ 71, 522, 525, 526 mahāprāṇa 44, 111, 672 māṃsa 232, 233 māṄ 591 māṅyoga 591 mātr̥kā 638 mātra 521 mātraC 521 mātrā 37, 70, 72, 74, 112, 124, 125, 128, 157, 159, 160, 165, 184, 185, 196-200, 256, 437, 439, 450, 506, 631, 639, 642, 643, 656-658, 679 mātrākāla 450, 506, 642 mātrādhikya 679 mātrārdha 70, 123, 124, 125, 184, 185, 643 matrāvibhāga 159 mātroccāra 643 mān 85, 89, 234, 235 mānta 673 māvasāna 145, 176, 637 māvasānānika 106 mIT 454 mitākṣara 647 mitra 381 mitravat 646 mithaḥ 540, 541 mināti 467, 468 miśra 617, 671 mīmāya 601 mukha 76, 113, 125, 133, 137, 140, 141, 148, 151, 635, 636 mukhanāsika 113, 125, 140, 141, 636 mukhanāsikāvacana 113 mukhaprāntādhobhāga 137

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ761 mukhaprāntordhvabhāga 137 mukhabila 133 mukhamudraṇa 151 mud 84, 268 muṣi 343, 684 mūrdhan 43, 72, 76, 133-135, 139, 142-144, 636, 653, 658, 682 mūrdhanāsika 139, 142 mūrdhanya 57, 63, 66, 72, 75, 76, 78, 102, 130, 132-135, 143, 201, 202, 326, 349, 369, 636, 653, 682 mūrdhanyalakāra 653 mūrdhanyasthāna 133 mūrdhaprānta 135 mūrdhasthāna 134, 143 mūla 64, 116, 636, 640, 648, 653, 679 mūlakāraṇa 116 mūlaśāstra 64 muṣi 343 mr̥du 145, 147, 423, 424 mr̥dutara 424 mr̥duprayatna 145, 147 me 220-222 mradīyas 422 y 33, 39, 42, 43, 56, 108, 125, 146, 174, 209, 210, 214, 285, 287, 288, 292, 296, 297, 300, 308, 349, 359, 388, 406, 410, 429, 430, 432, 460, 527-529, 534, 565, 566, 585, 586, 636, 638, 640, 651, 652, 655, 674, 678, 680, 681 ỹ 42, 43, 296, 297, 300, 674 ya 11, 50, 72, 74, 107, 119, 131, 132, 142, 146, 174, 208-210, 285, 308, 321, 388, 406, 429, 430, 432, 460, 527-529, 565, 566, 585, 586, 636, 638, 640, 651, 652, 655, 674, 678, 680, 681 yakāra 11, 50, 107, 132, 142, 209, 210, 285, 308, 321, 388, 406, 460, 529, 565, 566, 651, 652, 655, 674, 678, 680 yakārarephoṣmāpatti 209 yakārādi 388, 529 yakārādeśa 652 yaṄ 589 yajña 607-609, 611, 633, 666 yajñāṅga 666 yajñatati 607-609 yaṆ 410, 431, 536 yaT 654, 655 yatna 636, 646 yatva 585, 586, 681, 686 yathā 251, 608, 625 yathāmnāta 493, 629 yathāmnātasvara 493 yathāśāstra 614, 624, 625 yathāsaṃkhya 55, 56, 128, 139, 141, 246, 251, 253, 271 yad 213, 547, 550 yama (nasalized stop-allophones) 42, 117-119, 128, 138, 139, 192, 193, 251-254, 272, 398, 637, 640 yama (register) 120, 121, 643 yama (dual sounds?) 121 yami 597, 598 yaY 408, 471 yaR 267, 395, 403, 407, 408, 669 yaroṣmāpatti 208 yavalapara 674 yavānta 429, 430 yas patiḥ 338, 683 yā 529

762 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS yājuṣa 675 yājñika 607, 608 yājyāntaḥ 666 yātumāvat 506 yāthātathya 663 yādi 527, 528 yāvayati 596 yukta 470, 472, 500-503, 666, 667 yugapadvacana 157 yuṣmad 351, 352, 524 yuṣmadasmadādeśa 489 yuṣmadādeśa 351, 352 yuṣme 220-222 yoga 172, 176, 177, 179, 180, 183, 225, 226, 250, 636, 653, 654, 657, 658, 664, 670, 676, 686 yonāv adhy airayanta 503 yoni 680 yy 401 r 33, 39, 42, 56, 133, 142, 144, 157-160, 174, 178, 196, 202- 205, 207, 213, 214, 255-257, 276, 283, 290, 294, 295, 298, 300, 309-312, 314-319, 349, 368, 372, 389, 402-404, 410, 416, 418, 451, 452, 455, 456, 461, 473, 474, 603, 621, 636, 638, 640, 652, 653, 655, 656, 657, 675, 685 ra 75, 78, 102, 119, 133, 146, 157, 174, 195, 196, 208, 278, 283, 389, 403, 451, 452, 456, 471, 472, 475, 636, 638, 640, 653, 657, 675, 685 rakāra 657 rakāradvayayoga 657 rakta 215 rañjaka 647 rañjana 215 rathantara 317, 685 ralayoḥ sāvarṇyam 653 ralopa 389, 685 rahita 649 rājati 300, 675 rātri 317, 318, 685 rāyas poṣa 345, 346, 684 riphita 311, 621 riṣi 590, 591 rU 318, 533, 534, 677, 680 rutva 533, 534 ruvidhi 318 rupi 590, 591 rūḍhi 515 rūpa 53, 70, 148, 158, 172, 174, 184, 201, 202, 250, 379, 419, 448, 639, 652, 655, 657, 658, 661, 662, 663, 674, 675, 682 repha 12, 67, 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 102, 142, 157-159, 161, 172, 195, 196, 202-205, 209, 213, 241, 255-257, 259, 283, 294, 295, 308, 309, 311, 312, 314- 319, 354, 355, 359, 368, 371, 372, 402, 403, 425, 451, 636, 639, 642, 650, 653, 655, 656, 658, 660, 675, 676, 678, 680, 681, 684, 685 rephatva 658 rephatvābhāva 658 rephadharmin 685 rephapara 371, 372 rephaprakr̥ti 684 rephahakārakramaja 195, 255, 403, 642 rephādeśa 685 rephānta 684 rephitva 684

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ763 rephin 684, 685 rephivisargalopa 685 rephottara 658 rodana 665 rau 313, 314 raudvivacanānta 313, 314, 685 rh 403 l 33, 39, 42, 43, 56, 104, 135, 160, 178, 179, 202, 203, 205, 207, 214, 276, 296-299, 349, 410, 451, 473, 636, 638-640, 648, 653, 658, 672, 674, 675 l̃ 42, 43, 276, 296, 297, 299, 300, 674, 675 la 69, 119, 135, 146, 160, 161, 178, 179, 183, 202-205, 276, 277, 299, 300, 327, 451, 473, 636, 638-640, 648, 653, 658, 672, 674, 675 lakāra 12, 67, 69, 104, 135, 142, 160, 161, 178, 179, 183, 202- 205, 276, 277, 299, 300, 327, 473, 639, 648, 658, 672, 675 lakṣaṇa 63, 83, 102, 122, 205, 510, 574, 614, 617, 629, 640, 641 laghu 109, 112, 145, 147, 173, 182, 185-189, 285, 642 laghuguruprayojanābhāva 187, 642 laghugurulakṣaṇa 642 laghuprayatnatara 109, 112, 125, 145-147, 173, 285, 287, 652 latva 203, 204 lākṣaṇa 422 liṅga 112, 146, 232, 629, 641 liṅgasāmānya 112 lIṬ 212 liṭprathamaikavacanānta 212 lipi 251 luk 589, 664 lupta 174, 562 lekhana 250, 648, 679, 680 leśavr̥tti 107-110, 287, 288, 652 loka 609 lopa 78, 81, 99, 207, 208, 210, 223, 241, 278, 282-287, 297- 299, 321, 323, 325, 326, 356, 357, 389, 395, 397, 406, 472, 540, 552, 562, 565, 566, 573, 629, 645, 646, 648, 651-654, 656-658, 664, 672, 674, 675, 678-682, 685, 686 lopābhāva 672 laukika 562, 686 lh 179 ll 401 v 33, 39, 42, 43, 56, 108, 125, 137, 138, 146, 214, 285-288, 294, 297, 299-301, 349, 387, 406, 410, 429, 430, 507, 517, 518, 533-536, 548, 566, 636, 638, 640, 653, 669, 674, 675, 678, 680 ṽ 42, 43, 297, 300, 674 va 75, 119, 136, 137, 142, 146, 189, 210, 241, 242, 285-287, 294, 301, 406, 429, 430, 507, 517, 533-535, 548, 566, 636, 638, 640, 653, 669, 674, 675, 678, 680 vakāra 55, 76, 78, 107, 137, 142, 189, 285-287, 294, 301, 406, 507, 517, 533-535, 548, 566, 636, 653, 675, 678, 680 vakārādi 517, 548 vacana 113, 256, 626 vatu 68, 546, 547 vatUP 242, 546, 547

764 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS vatva 241 vadanti 437, 439 vani 597, 598 vandaneva vr̥kṣam 322, 323 varī 391, 392 varga 40, 50, 53, 72, 106, 108, 111-113, 119, 128-133, 136, 137, 139, 141, 250, 257, 274, 275, 278-281, 296, 297, 301, 302, 306, 307, 326, 355, 474, 636, 637, 648, 668, 670-672, 675, 680 vargaprathama 668, 670 vargaprathamākṣara 668 vargaviparyaya 257, 301, 675 vargākṣara 670, 671 vargāntara 141 vargādi 141 vargāntya 119, 128 vargottama 139 vargīya 274, 275, 278, 280, 281, 672 varja 335-338, 351, 352, 392, 481, 557, 560, 645, 683 varjita 649, 667, 676 varṇa 3, 33, 37, 39, 40, 44, 46, 49, 50, 68, 69, 72-74, 76, 78, 102, 111, 113, 116, 117, 119, 124, 125, 127-129, 131, 133, 135, 136, 139-141, 143, 153, 156, 157-163, 165, 167, 168, 173, 201, 208, 209, 213, 226, 241, 243, 244, 251, 253, 256, 264, 276, 394, 395, 397, 404, 412- 414, 416, 427, 451, 471, 552, 557, 629, 634-636, 638-641, 645, 646, 648-652, 654, 658, 659, 661, 663, 668-675, 685 varṇakāryādarśana 648 varṇakrama 244, 394, 397, 404 varṇaguṇa 41, 58, 111 varṇagraha 78, 650 varṇajāti 640 varṇadvayaja 163 varṇadharma 251, 253 varṇanāśa 686 varṇaprakr̥ti 116 varṇalopa 552 varṇavikāra 686 varṇaviparyaya 686 varṇasamāmnāya 49 varṇasāmānya 243, 634 varṇāgama 686 varṇānta 136, 557 varṇāntara 395 varṇābhāva 648 varṇoccāra 133, 635 varṇoccāraṇa 76, 125 varṇoccāraṇasthāna 125 varṇoccārasthāna 124 varṇaikya 646 varta 383 vartana 106 vaṃśakrama 618 vasantatilakā 189 vasu 381, 529, 542 vasU 68, 69, 235-238, 533-536 vasudhātaraḥ 542 vasvanta 68, 69, 235, 237, 238 vā 55, 69, 72, 75, 101, 107, 146, 149, 151, 173, 174, 193, 200, 207, 257, 259, 265, 267, 399, 407, 408, 429, 430, 480, 482, 483, 510, 525, 561, 652, 655, 660, 662, 663, 665, 667, 669, 671, 673, 677, 678, 680, 683, 685

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ765 vākya 505, 611, 629, 647, 661, 665, 676 vākyapūraṇa 647 vākyabheda 661, 662 vākyādhyāhāra 676 vāna 391, 392 vānta 654 vāyu 110 vār 312, 684 vāvr̥dhāna 590 vi 537 vikampita 437-439 vikalpa 75, 83, 525, 637, 648, 652, 653, 655, 661, 662, 665, 679 vikāra 634, 635, 686 vikr̥ta 148, 173, 557, 585 vikr̥ṣita 510 vikrānta 187 vigr̥hya 316, 582, 583 vigraha 478, 486, 487, 489, 500, 501-504, 525, 563, 564, 610 vighāta 258, 259 VIC 543 vicāryamāṇa 249, 666 VIṬ 543 vidi 237 vidma 386, 387 vidhā 243, 436, 437, 450 vidhāna 624, 658, 660, 686 vidhāyaka 649, 650, 654 vidhāraṇa 169-173, 648 vidhi 210, 223, 241, 318, 395, 489, 629, 639, 646, 680, 686 vidhīyamāna 649, 650 vinata 586 vināma 532, 617 vināśa 78, 649 vināśonmukha 78, 649 viniyoga 91 viparīta 302 viparyaya 257, 301, 302, 675, 686 viprakarṣa 303, 679 vipratiṣedha 653 vibhakta 611 vibhakti 68, 221, 317, 318, 378, 454-456, 511, 540, 629, 634, 641, 645, 647-649, 652, 664, 665 vibhaktinakāra 456 vibhaktirahita 649 vibhaktilopa 645, 664 vibhaktyanta 647 vibhaktyartha 511 vibhaktyalopa 540 vibhaktyāgamaprātipadikānta 454 vibhaktyādeśa 455 vibhāga 158, 159, 612 vibhāṣā 2, 62, 72, 83, 100-102, 205, 285, 526, 637, 640, 648, 654, 655, 660, 663, 666, 680, 684, 686 vibhāṣāprāpta 100-102, 637 virāma 146, 151, 152, 155, 156, 188, 191, 212, 249, 257, 301, 302, 435, 505, 584, 586, 648, 673, 675 vilambita 46, 198 vivakṣaṇa 641 vivakṣita 641 vi var 310-312, 684 vivaraṇa 148, 151 vivāra 120, 640 vivr̥ta 34, 43, 44, 52, 57, 77, 78, 116, 134, 147-156, 162, 636, 638, 645, 646, 654 vivr̥takaraṇa 149 vivr̥tatama 44, 54, 56, 151-153, 155, 162, 638, 644, 647, 654

766 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS vivr̥tatara 44, 54, 151-153, 155, 638, 644, 646, 647, 654 vivr̥tatarāvarṇa 153 vivr̥ttasandhi 217, 218, 230 vivr̥tti 436, 450, 506 viveka 635 viśeṣa 125, 126, 205, 510, 533, 635, 637, 646 viśeṣaṇa 152, 646 viśeṣapratipatti 205 viśpati 561, 562 viśpatnī 561, 562 viśrambha 644 viśva 381, 521, 522 viṣaya 647, 656 visarga 39, 42, 86, 90, 117, 128, 129, 146, 148, 158, 167-169, 172, 174, 185, 187, 188, 193, 194, 306, 329, 561, 638-640, 648, 678-682, 685, 686 visargalopa 681, 686 visargasandhi 146, 679 visargādeśa 679 visargopadha 681 visarjanīya 12, 73, 90, 104, 127- 129, 167, 168, 184, 209, 246, 260, 285, 288, 289, 291-295, 305-312, 314, 316-328, 330- 341-346, 356, 357, 401, 636, 638, 640, 648, 651, 658, 660, 676, 678-680, 683, 685 visarjanīyalopa 658 vīpsā 518 vUK 536 vr̥kṣān vanāni 294 vr̥tti 46, 54, 78, 88, 93, 98, 99, 106-110, 162, 163, 165, 197, 225, 246, 266, 287, 296, 305, 410, 438, 480, 481, 494, 539, 637, 639, 652, 668 vr̥ddha 555, 556 vr̥ddhi 408, 418, 419, 556, 557, 647, 661, 662 vr̥ddhimān 556 vr̥ddhisvarānta 556 veda 607-610 vedādhyayana 607-609 vaikr̥ta 676 vaikr̥tadhvani 46 vaidika 659, 665, 686 vailiṅgya 112 vaivr̥tta 436 vyañjaka 258 vyañjana 11, 34, 69, 72, 78, 111, 112, 117, 119, 120, 169-173, 179, 181-185, 187, 188, 191- 194, 196, 198, 243, 249, 250, 256, 257, 259, 324, 392, 394, 435, 436, 438, 441, 447, 522, 523, 550, 617, 642, 645, 646, 648-652, 654, 655, 658, 667, 668, 672, 675, 677, 679, 681, 685 vyañjanacatuṣka 194 vyañjanatrayasaṃyoga 193 vyañjanatva 658 vyañjanapara 259, 667 vyañjanamiśra 617 vyañjanarūpa 172 vyañjanavidhāraṇa 169-173, 648 vyañjanavyaveta 435, 436 vyañjanasandhi 182, 668, 679 vyañjanādi 550 vyañjanānta 187, 188 vyatyaya 250, 512, 552, 629 vyadhi 376, 568 vyapekṣā 683

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ767 vyapeta 435 vyavadhāna 250, 253, 270, 272, 653, 659 vyavasthā 102 vyavasthita 83, 102, 205, 525, 526 vyavasthitavibhāṣā 205, 526 vyavāya 12, 69, 302, 356, 357, 359, 360, 451, 455, 473-475, 653 vyavāyin 302 vyaveta 182, 249, 250, 256, 435, 436 vyākhyāna 205 vyāvr̥tti 221 vyāsa 442, 443, 445, 446 ś 33, 39, 41, 42, 56, 57, 90, 178, 268, 271-274, 276, 277, 280- 282, 284, 305, 306, 334, 403, 451, 473, 636, 638, 640, 653, 669-672, 675, 679, 680, 682 śa 69, 72, 74, 84, 111, 117, 131, 132, 148, 172, 174, 179, 181, 193, 268, 271, 272, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 284, 327, 403, 451, 473, 636, 638, 640, 653, 669-672, 675, 679, 680, 682 śakalyeṣin 419, 420 śakāra 132, 192, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 327, 473, 671, 672, 680 saṅkā 651, 665 śaṅkānirāsa 651 śaṅkāpraśna 665 śacī 339, 683 śataudana 607 śatruvat 646 śatva 172 śabda 167, 194, 202, 205, 212, 213, 221, 223, 226, 228-230, 233, 239, 249, 279, 415, 509, 511, 515, 525, 529, 561, 565, 566, 571, 594, 610, 612, 632 śabdavidhi 112 śabdaśāstra 632 śabdasaṃjñā 167 śaR 269, 271, 356, 357, 404, 640, 671, 680 śara 386, 387 śarpara 680 śas 518, 519 śān 85, 89, 234, 235 śāstra 629, 637 śāstradr̥ṣṭi 629 śikṣā 37 śīghratara 637 śuddha 211, 617, 624 śuddhīkaraṇa 92 śun 327, 328, 382, 682 śūdrādhikāra 666 śepaharṣaṇīm 322, 323 śeṣa 610 śeṣatā 610 ścu 278 śp 561 śrathi 597, 598 śravaṇa 667, 672 śruti 40, 442, 445 śreyaḥ 328, 329 śvāsa 44, 58, 113, 114, 116, 117, 119, 171-175, 637, 639, 640, 679 śvāsadhvanisaṃsarga 114 śvāsaprayatnaka śvāsānupradāna 117, 640 śvāsaikadeśa 679 ṣ 33, 36, 39, 41, 42, 56, 90, 134, 268, 271-273, 279, 280, 284, 305, 306, 316, 327, 333, 334,

768 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS 341-343, 348-365, 367, 369- 372, 403, 404, 451, 452, 456, 461, 473, 532, 572-574, 578- 583, 586, 588, 590, 618, 627, 628, 636, 638, 640, 653, 658, 669-672, 675-677, 679, 680, 682, 683 ṣa 75, 78, 84, 102, 111, 117, 133- 135, 148, 172, 174, 178, 181, 202, 268, 271, 272, 279, 284, 348, 350, 352-364, 366-372, 403, 451, 452, 456, 461, 471, 472, 473, 475, 572-574, 578- 582, 586, 590, 627, 628, 636, 638, 640, 653, 658, 669-672, 675, 677, 679, 680, 682, 683 ṣakāra 36, 72, 74, 133-135, 279, 348, 350, 352-364, 366-372, 451, 461, 636, 653, 672, 677, 680, 682, 683 ṣakārānta 279 ṣaṭ 201, 202 ṣatva 172, 572-574, 578-582, 586, 590, 627, 628, 658 ṣatvaṇatvavidhāna 658 ṣatvavidhāna 658 ṣaṣṭha 615 ṣaṣṭhī 78, 542, 543, 649 ṣaṣṭhīsamāsa 543 ṣaṣṭhyanta 542 ṣānta 471 ṣoḍaśin 551, 552 ṣṭu 72, 99, 278, 307, 327, 354, 574 ṣṭutva 99, 278, 327 ṢyaÑ 612 ṣṣ 354 s 33, 39, 41, 42, 86, 90, 135, 184, 252, 268, 270, 271, 273, 279, 280, 282, 284, 291, 292, 305, 306, 316, 322, 328-330, 332- 338, 340-346, 348-372, 403, 451, 473, 476, 522, 532, 546, 559-561, 572, 573, 581, 583, 588, 618, 636, 638, 640, 669- 672, 675-677, 679, 680, 682, 685, 686 sa 69, 84, 86, 111, 117, 135, 148, 172, 174, 179, 181, 202, 268, 270-272, 282, 284, 307, 328- 330, 332, 333, 336-346, 348, 350, 353-364, 366, 367, 369- 372, 403, 451, 473, 476, 522, 546, 559, 560, 636, 638, 640, 669-672, 675-677, 679, 680, 682, 685, 686 saḥ 324, 681, 685 saṃkhyā 525 saṃjñā 501, 515, 621, 635, 641, 642, 644-646, 648, 649, 651, 654, 656, 658, 663, 667, 668 saṃyukta 70, 72, 170, 171, 182- 185, 250, 648, 677, 680 saṃyoga 111, 112, 172, 179, 182, 183, 185-188, 192-194, 198, 245, 249, 250, 251, 256, 258, 259, 395, 397, 398, 402, 429, 642, 645, 647, 648, 650, 651, 655-658, 661, 662, 667, 668, 670, 674 saṃyogapara 198, 642 saṃyogādi 192, 193, 198, 398, 402, 642, 651, 674 saṃyogānta 395, 397 saṃyogābhighāta 667 saṃyogāvighāta 258, 259 saṃyojana 653, 655

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ769 saṃvr̥ta 44, 52, 78, 116, 150, 155- 157, 421, 636, 638, 640, 645, 647 saṃvr̥takaraṇa 156 saṃśaya 510, 538, 552, 559, 610, 612 saṃśayaccheda 612 saṃśliṣṭa 641 saṃsarga 114 saṃsr̥ṣṭa 157, 165 saṃskāra 528 saṃspr̥ṣṭa 54, 147, 157-160, 162, 163, 165, 639 saṃspr̥ṣṭarepha 157, 159, 160, 639 saṃspr̥ṣṭavarṇa 54, 162, 163 saṃhita 226, 614 saṃhitā 11, 35, 36, 37, 80, 81, 91, 98, 99, 166, 212, 215, 216, 218, 220, 221, 227, 248, 249, 263, 265, 266, 282, 286-288, 299, 300, 310, 311, 313-317, 319, 322, 323, 325-327, 343, 349, 355, 371, 372, 374, 375, 380, 382, 386, 396, 406, 414, 419, 430, 442, 445, 450, 460- 462, 467, 470, 476, 524, 528, 534, 561, 563, 580, 581, 583- 588, 590-597, 599-602, 604, 605, 610-614, 621, 624, 626- 628, 634, 635, 641, 646, 650, 668 saṃhitākāla 467, 626 saṃhitādārḍhya 612 saṃhitāpadadārḍhya 613 saṃhitāpāṭha 98, 99, 194, 212, 215, 216, 218, 220, 221, 227, 248, 249, 263, 265, 266, 282, 286-288, 299, 300, 310, 311, 313-317, 319, 322, 323, 325- 327, 343, 349, 355, 371, 372, 374, 375, 380, 382, 386, 396, 406, 414, 419, 430, 442, 450, 460-462, 467, 470, 476, 524, 528, 534, 561, 563, 580, 581, 583-588, 590-597, 599-602, 604, 605, 610-614, 621, 624, 626-628, 634, 635 saṃhitāvat 626-627, 629 saṃhitāvadvacana 626, 627 sakāra 68, 69, 71, 74, 91, 135, 270, 282, 307, 328-330, 332, 336-346, 348, 350, 353-364, 366, 367, 369-373, 476, 522, 546, 559, 560, 672, 676, 677, 680, 682, 683, 685, 686 sakārasthānīyavisarga 682, 683, 686 sakārāgama 476 sakārādi 559 sakārādeśa 685 sacati 683 sajātīya 652 satva 86, 172, 333, 682 sattva 112, 479, 528, 641 sattvanāman 528 sattvapr̥thaktva 112 sattvapradhāna 479 sattvākhya 479 sadi 365-367 sadr̥śa 637, 679 sadyaḥ 328, 329 saN 85, 233-235 sanutar 315, 685 santāna 37 sandigdha 641 sandeha 66, 67, 201, 205, 328, 532, 538, 547, 551-553, 559, 612, 613

770 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS sandehāpanaya 612 sandehāpanodana 613 sandhāna 614, 615, 618, 624, 625 sandhānalakṣaṇa 625 sandhānavidhāna 624 sandhi 109, 111, 158, 162-165, 177, 182, 187, 216-218, 230, 249, 292, 299, 317, 323, 404, 406, 408, 409, 419, 420, 425, 428, 448, 538, 611, 617, 618, 625, 633, 635, 641, 644, 646, 650, 652, 654, 658, 663, 665, 667, 668, 675, 677, 679, 686 sandhija 428 sandhiyoga 658 sandhisādhana 635, 650 sandhistha 651, 675, 677 sandhisthānādeśīyavarṇa 651 sandhya 98, 99, 167, 278, 301- 303, 407, 410, 418, 649, 651, 675, 677, 687 sandhyakṣara 39, 53, 54, 76, 121, 136, 143, 150, 154, 162-165, 410, 411, 644, 651, 654, 675, 680 sanna 172-174, 183, 441, 444, 447, 640 sannatara 170-174, 183, 441, 444, 447, 640 sannikarṣa 646 sannipāta 302 saptamī 68, 69, 78, 216, 217, 649, 664 saptamyartha 68, 69, 216, 217, 664 sabhāva 485 sam 300, 537, 559, 560, 675 sama 651 samanta 536 samartha 481, 489, 502 samasta 479, 480, 490, 557 samasyate 498, 524, 525, 544 samāna 39, 70, 74, 78, 121, 126, 139, 140, 150, 156, 184, 185, 251, 252, 259, 278, 279, 368, 442-446, 451, 452, 456, 471, 472, 475, 618, 637, 640, 641, 643, 644, 653, 656, 658, 659, 667, 672, 685 samānakaraṇa 70, 184, 185 samānatva 641 samānadharma 651 samānapada 139, 251, 253, 278, 279, 368, 442, 443, 445, 446, 451, 452, 456, 471, 472, 475, 626, 653, 672 samānayama 11, 120, 121, 643 samānākṣara 11, 68, 74, 259, 412, 618, 641, 656, 667, 685 samānākṣarapara 259, 667 samānāsyaprayatna 70, 140, 156, 412 samānasthānakaraṇāsyaprayatna 141, 646 samāmnāta 608, 634 samāmnāya 35, 38, 49, 634, 639 samāpatti 67, 201, 202, 462, 572, 573, 577-580, 582, 584-589, 590, 593-597, 599, 603-605 samāpādya 572, 574, 620, 621, 626, 627 samāsa 65, 66, 68, 91, 193, 328- 331, 348, 453, 454, 478, 480- 482, 499, 501, 507, 523, 525, 526, 533-535, 539-543, 562, 600, 657, 660, 662, 665, 676, 681-683, 685 samāsavat 539

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ771 samāsānyāya 562 samāhāra 153, 163, 643 samāhāravarṇa 153 samudāya 670 samudra 555 sam airayan ta 295, 296, 678 samparka 685 sampr̥kta 663 samprasāraṇa 536 sambaddhārtha 488, 489 sambandha 610, 678, 685 sambandhin 678 sambuddhi 81, 227, 229 sambodhana 645, 665 sayama 192, 193, 398 sarūpa 45, 53, 639, 652, 655, 674 sarva 560 sarvatīkṣṇa 424 sarvatra 433, 434 sarvanāman 221, 310, 311, 569, 649, 684 sarvavedapāriṣada 101 sarvādi 649 sarvānudātta 491 salakāra 160, 161, 639 savarga 51 savargīya savarṇa 50-52, 68, 70, 71, 74, 78, 117, 126, 140, 141, 144, 146, 149, 153, 156, 276, 408, 412, 471, 589, 635, 638-640, 645, 646, 649, 650, 653, 655, 656, 659, 675, 682 savarṇagrahaṇa 51-53, 56, 141, 144, 649 savarṇadīrgha 412, 656, 682 savarṇadharma 635 savarṇamātra 650 savarṇavat 52 savikalpaka 632 savidha 436, 437 savya 362 savyañjana 192 sasavarṇa 650 sasthāna 40, 41, 69, 84, 111, 246, 268, 276, 278, 279, 296, 305, 306, 327, 401, 645, 648, 651, 653, 672-674, 679, 680, 682 sasthānakaraṇa 645 sasthānatva 653, 682 sasthānatvabala 651 sas padīṣṭa 324 sasvara 256 sahayoga 670 sahasra, sahasrasātama 542-544 sahi 348, 350, 359, 374, 379, 570, 594 sahita 670, 674 sāṃhitika 618 sāṭ 348-350 sāḍbhūta 348-350, 374 sāḍha 379, 380 sātrāsāha 391 sādr̥śya 648, 654, 679 sādhaka 641, 647 sādhakatama 635, 647 sādharmya 668 sādhu 529 sādhya 687 sānusvāra 188, 189, 642 sānta 683, 685 sāmagāyana 667 sāman 37 sāmarthya 489, 501, 502, 641, 660, 683 sāmānya 2, 62, 63, 72, 78, 100- 102, 112, 155, 637, 646 sāmānyaśāstra 637

772 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS sāmīpya 143 sārūpya 652 sāvarṇya 57, 78, 116, 149, 161, 646, 653, 656, 658, 659 sāhyāma 386, 593, 594 sici 359, 628 siddha 223, 250, 281, 408, 471, 504, 505, 535, 634, 635, 649, 653-657, 659, 671, 672, 677, 678, 687 siddhatva 504, 505 sīmanta 413 su 531 sukhoccāra 644 sUṬ 210, 561, 677, 682 suÑ 68, 363, 364, 377 suP 219, 647, 660-662, 664 suptiṅanta 647 suprāvyā 508-510 subanta 219, 647 subdhātu 661, 662 subhiṣaktama 544 sumna 529, 530 suluk 664 sūtracāritārthya 642 sūtrabala 653, 655 sūtravidhānasāmarthya 660 sūtrasāmarthya 641 sūtrārambha 223 sr̥ji 368, 369 sr̥pi 368, 369 sottarāvayava 648 sopapada 294, 311, 372 sopapadagrahaṇa 294, 311, 372, 379 sopasarga 483 soma 363 soṣmatā 111 soṣman 40, 41, 84, 110-112, 244, 245, 399, 637, 670, 676 sautra 659, 686 skandi 370, 371 st 184 stambh 282, 672 stambhi 563 stu 278 str̥ṇāti 371 str̥ta 353 stoma 363 strīpuṃsaliṅga 146 straiṣūya 355, 356, 587 sthā 282, 359-361, 563, 672 sthāna (point of articulation) 43, 51, 54, 63, 72, 75, 76, 78, 84, 102, 111, 114, 117, 121, 124, 125, 127-130, 132-137, 139- 144, 151, 163, 164, 165, 172, 246, 268, 278, 279, 296, 305, 306, 327, 401, 635, 636, 639, 645, 646, 648, 672-674, 679, 680 sthāna (place) 144, 164, 165, 176, 211, 246, 281, 639, 640, 646, 649, 651-656, 659-662, 668, 670, 672, 674, 676-678, 680, 682 sthānakārya 640 sthānapradeśārtha 655 sthānaprayatnabala 646 sthānaprayatnaviveka 635, 640 sthānavidhāna 165 sthānavidhi 163-165, 639, 646 sthānaviveka 635 sthānārtha 649 sthānin 210, 281, 651 sthānivat 210, 281, 651 sthānivadbhāva 210, 281, 651

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ773 sthāniśaṅkānirāsa 651 sthāneyoga 144, 164, 176, 649 sthiti 111 sparśa 34, 35, 38, 39, 41, 43, 73, 76, 78, 88, 104-111, 113, 135, 137, 139, 145, 146, 175-177, 179, 182, 183, 239, 246, 251, 253, 283, 284, 287-289, 296, 470, 472, 636-638, 648, 651, 652, 668, 673, 674, 676 sparśana 128, 137, 151 sparśayukta 470, 472 sparśavarga 113 sparśasaṃyoga 179 sparśasama 253 sparśākṣara 651 sparśāntaḥsthasaṃyoga 183 spr̥śi 368, 369 spr̥ṣṭa 2, 44, 76, 78, 126, 132, 145-147, 150-152, 158, 636- 638, 652 sphurati 369 sphulati 369 sphūrji 368, 369 sphoṭa 46 sphoṭana 257-259, 301-303, 667, 675 smarati 368, 369 sva 353, 354 svapi 354 svapna 529 svabhāva 163 svar 315, 316, 452 svara (accent) 37, 43, 45, 426, 430-432, 434-437, 447, 450, 479, 480-483, 486, 487, 493, 504, 505, 540, 610-613, 629, 635, 643 svara (vowel) 3, 11, 34, 69, 75, 77, 78, 103, 111, 116, 118-121, 128, 141, 145, 146, 149-151, 155, 157-159, 161, 173, 182, 184, 187, 188, 191, 192, 194- 196, 199, 200, 208-211, 213, 217, 224, 230, 242-244, 246, 249, 250, 255-259, 263, 264, 285, 292, 293, 301, 308, 309, 321, 392, 396-399, 403, 404, 407, 408, 410-412, 416, 472, 504, 505, 515, 527, 528, 555- 557, 611, 617, 618, 629, 635, 636, 638, 641, 642, 644-648, 650, 651, 653, 655, 656, 658, 660, 661, 663, 665-668, 672- 674, 678, 680-682, 684-686 svarajñāna 612, 635 svarati 368, 369 svaratva 658 svaradharma 658 svarapara 255, 256, 259, 655, 667 svarapūrva 407, 660, 682 svarabhakti 255, 257-259, 301, 416, 655 svarabhāga 159, 161, 213, 655 svaramātrā 157 svaralopa 472 svaravant 447 svaravibhāga 158 svaravyañjanānta 187, 188, 642 svarasandhi 617, 618, 650, 663 svarasādhana 635 svarahīna 611, 642, 644, 645, 652 svarahīnamantradoṣa 611 svarādi 230, 392, 515 svarānta 555-557, 617 svarābhighāta 667

774 INDEX OF SANSKRIT TERMS svarita 43, 75, 120-125, 173, 187, 188, 422-425, 427, 429-431, 433, 435-439, 441, 442, 444- 447-449, 490, 491, 509, 611, 614, 641, 643, 644 svaritapara 444 svaritamaṇḍala 423 svaritabheda 122 svaritādi 490, 491 svarūpa 148, 682 svarodaya 397 svaropajana 613 svargakāmo aghāyatām 607 svaryate 441-444, 448, 449, 509, 644 svaryamāṇa 242, 448 svarṣāḥ 316, 685 svavarga 253, 648, 668 svavargatr̥tīya 668 svasthānakaraṇa 127, 141 svasvara 437 svādi 645 svāra 424 svārabalābala 424 svārtha 259, 533, 667, 685 svāhākāra 609 h 33, 39, 41, 42, 56, 99, 112, 113, 118, 127-129, 138, 178-180, 196, 254, 255, 269, 278, 279, 349, 402, 403, 564, 636, 638- 640, 642, 648, 651-653, 670, 671, 674, 675, 679, 681 h̐ 138, 254, 675 ha 116, 119, 129, 148, 179, 180, 183, 192, 195, 196, 254, 255, 269, 402, 403, 564, 636, 638- 640, 642, 648, 651-653, 670, 671, 674, 675, 679, 681 hakāra 41, 44, 111-113, 116, 117, 128, 138, 179, 180, 195, 196, 254, 255, 269, 402, 403, 564, 636, 639, 642, 648, 651-653, 670, 679, 681 hakārasadr̥śa 679 hakārādi 564 hani 85, 234, 472 haninakāra 472 hanu 76, 130, 133, 143, 636 hanumadhyadeśa 133 hanumūla 72, 130, 143, 636 hanti 472, 563 harati 563 haL 182, 639, 645, 646, 673, 685 haviḥ 330, 682 hasaṃyoga 183 hi 367, 368 hinoti 470, 600 hīna 172-174, 640 hīnaśvasanādaḥ 172-174, 640 hr̥daya 636 hrasva 43, 50, 74, 76, 78, 121, 124, 125, 141, 159, 165, 182, 185-187, 190, 191, 196, 197, 200, 230, 231, 239, 242, 243, 256, 296, 350, 351, 392, 396, 397, 413, 432, 433, 449, 533, 534, 550, 594, 629, 638, 641- 644, 646, 656, 657, 665, 672, 673 hrasvagrahaṇa 125 hrasvanāmin 432, 433 hrasvapūrva 397 hrasvasvara 673 hrasvasvarita 124 hrasvābhāva 644 hrasvopadha 191, 296, 396, 397, 673

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ775 hrasvobhayataḥ 256 hl 179 ḷ 145, 162 ḷh 145

Index of Textual Sources and Authors Abhyankar, K.V. 480, 539, 573, 591 Abhyankar, Sunanda R. 77 Ādināthapurāṇa 634 Agnipurāṇa 161 Āgniveśya 90, 306, 334 Aitareya-Āraṇyaka 34, 35, 36, 41, 111, 146 2.2.4: 33, 111 3.2.1: 33, 111, 146 3.2.6: 36 Aitareyabrāhmaṇa 114, 633 Aithal, Paramesvara 14 Akkole, Subhashchandra 634 Allen, W.S. 32, 43, 90, 109, 116, 118, 121, 123, 126-128, 131, 134, 135, 137, 138, 144, 146- 148, 150, 157, 158, 162, 169, 171, 173, 181, 189, 190, 191, 197, 198, 199, 252, 254, 255, 257, 259, 301-303, 306, 307, 334, 342-344, 421 Anantabhaṭṭa 64 Anubhūtisvarūpācārya 13, 79 Anulomakalpa 191 Ānyatareya 447, 448 Āpastambaśrautasūtra 375 Āpiśali 660 Āpiśaliśikṣā 37, 114-117, 127, 129, 130, 134, 141, 152 APR, see: Atharvaprātiśākhya Apte, V.M. 633 Āśvalāyanagr̥hyasūtra 167, 633 Āśvalāyanaśrautasūtra 375, 465 Ātharvaṇapariśiṣṭa 3, 14, 70, 191, 425 Atharvaprātiśākhya (APR, ed. by Surya Kanta) 2, 14, 60, 79, 82- 87, 89-91, 93, 94, 121, 124, 143, 179, 204, 209, 220-222, 228, 229, 232, 234, 265, 267, 268, 270, 272, 273, 275, 277, 283, 287, 293, 295, 296, 307, 311, 315, 317-319, 324, 325, 327, 329, 331, 333-346, 351- 353, 361, 363-370, 373-375, 377, 378, 380, 383-393, 401, 404-407, 409, 413, 415, 416, 420-422, 427, 432-435, 440, 444, 456-458, 462, 465, 468- 470, 472, 473, 482, 483, 487- 489, 498, 501-504, 511, 516, 518, 519, 522-524, 526, 527, 529-532, 538, 550, 552-564, 566-569, 571, 572, 574, 580, 589, 592, 593, 595-597, 600- 602, 604, 605, 625, 629 Atharvaveda, Paippalāda 80, 83, 87, 92, 175, 177, 178, 183, 185, 186, 192, 196, 203, 204, 206, 209, 210, 221, 226, 231, 236, 238, 239, 249, 398, 465, 494, 496, 512, 513, 551, 664, 665 1.10.1: 551 1.10.3: 551 1.41.3: 192 1.89.3: 183

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 778 Atharvaveda, Paippalāda (cont.) 2.31.2: 192, 398 2.55.5: 496 5.16.5: 203 5.21.4: 238, 239 5.34.2: 496 6.6.8: 664 7.5.8: 177 8.14.8: 186 9.4.9: 221, 222 9.8.1: 494 9.10.5: 414 10.9.7: 175 12.7.8: 183 14.2.13: 185 15.10.4: 665 15.18.6: 494 15.19.1-12: 494 16.2.9: 465 16.23.1: 210, 231 16.35.2: 105 16.127.1-5: 186 16.139.18: 206 16.151.7: 209 17.14.4: 186 17.20.2: 249 17.23.4: 226 17.36.4: 236 19.6.3: 512 19.41.5: 204 20.13.8: 196 20.58.6: 231 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya 1-3, 14, 33, 35, 67, 74, 79, 80-94, (passim) 1.1.1: 33, 122, 339, 364, 480, 482, 498 1.1.2: 122, 224, 225, 480, 617 1.1.3: 122, 193, 229, 500, 665 1.1.4: 186, 197, 225, 241, 481, 507, 615 1.2.1: 227, 386, 507 1.2.2: 122 1.2.3: 158, 297, 357, 358, 368 1.2.4: 122, 186, 191, 192, 197, 225, 387 1.3.1: 104, 122, 188, 280, 352, 434, 480, 481, 573, 577, 578, 583 1.3.3: 298, 480 1.3.6: 172 1.3.8: 357 1.4.1: 388, 528 1.4.2: 122, 480 1.4.3: 188 1.4.4: 186, 266, 443, 531 1.5.1: 174, 191, 367, 582, 584 1.5.2: 122 1.5.3: 156 1.6.1: 174, 610 1.6.2: 156, 176, 188 1.6.4: 122, 168, 214, 444, 611 1.7.2: 498 1.7.3: 122, 174, 187, 191, 193 1.7.4: 156, 168, 183, 183, 191, 292, 398, 401 1.7.5: 199 1.7.7: 293 1.8.1: 194, 238, 239 1.8.2: 122, 191, 197, 225, 548 1.8.3: 501 1.8.4: 590 1.9.1: 188, 266, 401 1.9.3: 139, 208, 498 1.9.4: 346 1.10.1: 335 1.10.2: 105, 183, 186, 193 1.10.3: 122

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ779 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 1.10.4: 101, 103, 267 1.11.1: 257, 259, 372, 491 1.11.2: 295 1.11.3: 183 1.12.1: 307, 513, 566 1.12.2: 257, 259, 480, 584 1.12.3: 187, 346 1.12.4: 172, 174, 185 1.13.1: 326 1.13.2: 306 1.14.2: 120, 124, 163, 226, 430 1.14.3: 199, 295 1.14.4: 306, 328 1.15.1: 122, 491, 500 1.15.2: 295, 409 1.15.3: 498 1.16.2: 191, 194, 198 1.16.3: 371, 385, 485 1.16.4: 194, 198 1.18.4: 365 1.19.1: 281, 568 1.19.3: 183, 186, 197, 293, 315 1.19.4: 139, 195, 255, 306, 402, 403, 557 1.20.2: 163, 596 1.20.3: 386, 596 1.20.4: 142, 391 1.22.2: 325, 570, 605 1.24.1: 399, 401, 556 1.24.4: 143, 283, 364, 376, 389, 500, 603, 618 1.24.8: 568 1.25.2: 419 1.25.3: 188 1.25.4: 520 1.26.4: 358, 586 1.27.1: 336 1.27.2: 187 1.27.3: 302, 384, 385 1.28.1: 488, 500, 551 1.28.3: 206 1.28.4: 183 1.29.1: 383, 385, 573 1.29.3: 195, 402, 403 1.29.6: 365, 391 1.30.3: 367, 378 1.31.1: 154, 571 1.31.4: 158 1.32.1: 226, 558, 579 1.32.3: 219 1.32.4: 383 1.33.2: 274, 275, 548-550, 574 1.33.4: 122, 434 1.34.1: 491 1.34.2: 103, 186, 192, 197, 198, 399 1.34.3: 517, 573, 578 1.34.4: 101, 267, 514, 516 1.34.5: 405 1.35.1: 105 1.35.4: 218, 352, 548 1.94.9: 326 1.100.16: 172 2.1.1: 264 2.1.2: 238, 303, 340, 533, 684 2.1.3: 174 2.1.4: 218, 361, 550 2.1.5: 168, 174, 503, 513 2.2.1: 174, 338, 532 2.2.2: 338 2.2.3: 172, 174 2.2.4: 174, 381 2.2.5: 168, 172, 174 2.3.1: 258, 302, 523 2.3.3: 168, 169, 307 2.3.4: 174 2.3.6: 174

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 780 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 2.4.1: 582 2.4.5: 172, 174 2.4.6: 168 2.5.1: 172 2.5.2: 120, 122, 124, 172, 198, 315, 316, 431, 440, 444 2.5.3: 105, 148, 172, 350, 374, 385, 485, 570 2.5.4: 174, 409, 440, 617-619 2.5.5: 186, 192 2.5.6: 168, 172, 174 2.5.7: 388, 528 2.6.1: 172 2.6.2: 277 2.6.3: 558 2.6.4: 361 2.6.5: 172 2.7.2: 172, 328, 556, 573 2.7.5: 194 2.8.4: 174 2.8.5: 168 2.9.2: 122, 514, 544 2.9.4: 174 2.9.5: 172, 174 2.10.2: 378 2.10.4: 174 2.10.7: 313 2.10.8: 458 2.11.1: 237 2.11.2: 237, 368 2.11.3: 237 2.11.4: 237 2.11.5: 237 2.12.1: 186, 253, 443 2.12.2: 436, 442, 447 2.12.3: 436, 442, 447 2.12.4: 188, 550 2.12.5: 417 2.12.6: 210, 428, 429 2.12.7: 206, 390, 595 2.13.2: 143, 278, 560 2.13.3: 283, 389 2.15.1: 188, 199, 387 2.15.3: 401 2.15.5: 183, 188 2.20.1: 103 2.25.1: 311 2.26.1: 527 2.26.2: 535 2.27.3: 122 2.27.5: 176, 209, 540, 573 2.27.6: 191 2.28.2: 572 2.28.4: 172, 352 2.29.4: 122, 175 2.29.5: 177 2.30.1: 405 2.30.3: 179, 321-2 2.30.5: 156, 183 2.31.1: 102, 106, 176, 191, 194, 209, 394 2.31.2: 179, 181 2.32.1: 180, 397 2.32.3: 517 2.32.5: 611 2.33.1: 532 2.33.5: 531 2.33.6: 205, 531 2.34.2: 484 2.34.3: 353 2.34.4: 123, 172, 353, 508 2.34.5: 336 2.35.1: 511, 529 2.35.2: 296, 297 2.35.3: 250, 533 2.36.1: 103, 556 2.36.2: 121

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ781 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 2.36.4: 324, 366 2.36.8: 298 2.55.5: 496 3.1.1: 324 3.1.2: 569 3.1.3: 274, 281, 388, 528 3.2.3: 397 3.3.2: 596 3.3.3: 148, 198 3.3.4: 188 3.4.1: 402 3.4.4: 548 3.5.1: 378, 557, 558 3.5.5: 519 3.5.7: 452 3.6.1: 140, 190, 231, 239, 298, 336 3.6.2: 472 3.6.4: 416, 590 3.6.8: 458 3.7.1: 206, 365 3.8.1: 203 3.8.3: 390, 594 3.8.5: 222, 307 3.8.6: 253 3.9.1: 341 3.9.2: 186 3.9.4: 528 3.9.6: 370 3.10.1: 546 3.10.4: 495, 532 3.10.5: 330 3.10.6: 339 3.10.8: 142, 183 3.10.10: 148, 158, 610, 611 3.10.11: 303 3.10.12: 123, 359, 360 3.11.3: 437 3.11.4: 193, 437 3.12.2: 387, 388, 546 3.12.6: 231 3.12.7: 372 3.12.9: 122 3.13.1: 432, 440 3.13.3: 264, 312 3.13.6: 312 3.13.7: 177, 308, 312 3.14.1: 298, 487 3.14.3: 419, 536 3.15.4: 460, 581, 602 3.15.5: 402, 602 3.16.1: 315, 570 3.16.4: 242 3.16.7: 387, 388, 390, 594 3.17.1: 322 3.17.5: 519 3.18.1: 185, 379 3.18.5: 590 3.18.6: 490 3.19.1: 210 3.19.4: 237 3.19.6: 206, 269-70, 496 3.20.2: 105, 494 3.20.6: 103, 218, 286, 405, 548-550 3.20.10: 370 3.21.1: 421 3.21.3: 590 3.21.5: 502 3.21.6: 437 3.21.9: 297 3.22.5: 547 3.22.6: 582 3.23.3: 238-9 3.23.4: 352 3.23.6: 342 3.24.2: 120, 124, 430

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 782 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 3.24.6: 186, 544 3.24.7: 103 3.25.2: 179, 203 3.25.6: 187 3.26.1: 122, 440 3.26.4: 376 3.27.3: 553 3.27.5: 188 3.28.3: 532 3.28.4: 542, 543, 544 3.28.5: 300 3.29.1: 202, 264, 551 3.29.3: 300 3.29.6: 188, 199 3.30.3: 529 3.30.5: 298, 300 3.30.7: 556 3.31.4: 219 3.31.9: 559 4.1.1: 311, 370 4.1.3: 101, 267, 570 4.2.2: 559 4.2.4: 523 4.2.5: 188, 199, 218 4.2.7: 601 4.2.8: 179 4.3.1: 105, 560 4.3.2: 400, 401, 528, 560 4.3.4: 368 4.3.6: 512, 513, 546 4.4.1: 323, 326, 379, 573 4.4.8: 514, 515 4.5.4: 380 4.5.6: 561, 562 4.6.2: 360 4.6.3: 546, 591, 592 4.6.5: 362 4.6.8: 352 4.7.3: 328, 329, 353, 591, 592 4.7.5: 104, 168, 186, 384, 398, 401, 591 4.7.6: 352, 591 4.8.6: 222, 474 4.9.9: 336 4.10.1: 336 4.10.2: 503 4.10.4: 336, 337 4.11.1: 148, 194 4.11.3: 510, 511 4.11.4: 253 4.11.7: 361, 381 4.11.8: 547 4.11.9: 321 4.12.3: 400, 401 4.12.4: 232, 233 4.12.5: 206 4.13.2: 286 4.13.5: 553 4.13.6: 544 4.14.1: 156 4.14.2: 185, 338 4.14.5: 355 4.14.7: 530, 563 4.14.9: 532 4.15.5: 183, 195, 196, 403 4.15.11: 409, 440 4.15.15: 165, 166, 200, 247, 248, 259-261 4.16.1: 101, 267, 268, 490 4.16.2: 602 4.16.3: 163, 226 4.16.6: 220 4.17.2: 597 4.17.5: 297, 466, 556 4.18.3: 168, 234 4.18.6: 191, 205, 206, 225 4.19.1: 399

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ783 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 4.19.2: 587, 588 4.19.5: 293 4.19.7: 180, 293 4.20.2: 304 4.20.5: 325, 330, 605 4.20.7: 495 4.21.1: 220, 221 4.21.4: 559 4.21.6: 206 4.22.4: 229 4.22.6: 534 4.20.7: 346 4.22.2: 353 4.23.1: 235, 535 4.23.3: 501 4.24.1: 472 4.24.5: 287 4.25.3: 228, 469 4.25.4: 330 4.25.5: 216, 217 4.25.6: 228, 411, 491 4.25.7: 189 4.26.1: 219, 220 4.27.1: 183, 390 4.27.4: 337 4.27.6: 569 4.28.1: 548 4.29.1: 517 4.29.2: 517 4.29.4: 145 4.29.5: 365, 567 4.29.6: 515, 516 4.29.7: 529 4.30.4: 122, 225, 497, 558 4.30.6: 509 4.31.3: 220, 221, 245, 523 4.31.4: 228 4.32.1: 386, 594, 663 4.32.3: 428 4.32.4: 365: 391 4.32.5: 314, 385, 593 4.32.6: 142, 208, 209, 228, 295 4.32.7: 211, 233 4.33.2: 511, 529, 530 4.33.3: 122, 192, 197 4.33.6: 336 4.34.1: 371 4.34.3: 415 4.34.5: 536 4.35.1: 455 4.35.2: 455 4.35.3: 455 4.35.4: 455 4.35.5: 455 4.35.6: 455 4.36.1: 272, 388 4.36.5: 296 4.37.1: 143, 174, 283, 389, 567 4.37.4: 567 4.38.3: 457 4.38.5: 300, 585 4.39.1: 418 4.39.2: 309, 342 4.39.4: 284, 309 4.39.9: 328, 495 4.40.8: 148 5.1.1: 101, 267 5.1.2: 232 5.1.3: 219, 221 5.1.5: 219, 364, 376, 385, 603 5.1.7: 253 5.2.1: 210 5.2.3: 220-222 5.2.5: 152 5.2.7: 403 5.2.8: 316 5.3.6: 168, 461

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 784 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 5.3.8: 384, 591 5.3.9: 338 5.3.55: 515 5.3.57: 515 5.4.1: 409, 440 5.4.2: 336 5.4.3: 513 5.4.8: 397 5.4.10: 317, 330 5.5.3: 462, 604 5.5.4: 332, 333 5.5.6: 74, 350, 351 5.5.9: 358, 586, 626 5.6.4: 364, 376, 603 5.6.5: 430 5.6.9: 601 5.7.2: 498, 578 5.7.6: 218, 286, 405, 428 5.7.7: 320 5.7.8: 511, 529 5.8.2: 368 5.8.5: 498 5.8.7: 275 5.11.3: 601 5.11.5: 582 5.11.6: 327, 471, 472 5.11.7: 142, 208, 209, 295 5.11.8: 532 5.11.10: 122 5.12.2: 513 5.12.5: 445, 529 5.12.6: 358, 390, 550, 586, 594 5.12.8: 145, 566 5.12.11: 158 5.13.5: 228 5.13.6: 209, 309, 391 5.13.8: 446 5.13.9: 376, 568 5.14.4: 493, 494 5.14.7: 464 5.14.8: 374, 570 5.14.9: 568 5.14.11: 370 5.15.2: 140, 190, 208, 231, 298 5.15.3: 190, 231, 298 5.15.4: 140, 190, 231, 298 5.15.6: 279, 304 5.17.1: 420, 427 5.17.4: 328 5.17.5: 264 5.17.9: 120, 124, 431 5.17.11: 495 5.18.7: 297, 611, 614 5.18.11: 601 5.18.12: 322 5.19.1: 521 5.19.2: 306 5.19.3: 179, 303 5.19.4: 502 5.19.7: 375, 599 5.19.8: 328 5.19.10: 601 5.19.13: 204, 385, 588 5.20.1: 231 5.20.2: 517 5.20.4: 183 5.20.6: 337, 547, 579 5.20.8: 270 5.20.9: 470, 611 5.20.10: 329 5.20.11: 287, 350, 374, 570 5.21.8: 309, 398 5.22.1: 74, 351, 529 5.22.2: 341, 342 5.22.5: 179 5.22.6: 353 5.22.7: 306

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ785 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 5.22.9: 178 5.22.14: 275 5.23.1: 241-2 5.23.4: 206 5.23.7: 258, 302, 523 5.23.8: 293 5.24.1: 317, 474 5.25.8: 370 5.25.9: 517 5.26.12: 258, 302 5.27.1: 123 5.27.6: 542 5.27.8: 358 5.27.9: 314 5.28.11: 553 5.28.14: 213, 277 5.29.2: 344, 514 5.29.3: 344 5.29.11: 205 5.29.12: 231 5.30.1: 105, 199 5.30.9: 380 5.30.10: 601 5.30.16: 601 5.31.10: 458 5.31.11: 205, 222 5.34.2: 496 6.1.1: 226 6.1.2: 368 6.1.3: 365 6.4.1: 157, 339, 353, 587 6.4.2: 187, 210, 231 6.4.3: 341, 342, 460, 684 6.6.4: 377 6.8.1: 405, 536, 537 6.8.2: 405 6.8.3: 405 6.9.1: 604 6.9.3: 386, 597 6.10.4: 335 6.11.1: 140, 190, 298 6.11.2: 239, 627 6.11.3: 160, 203, 356, 587, 591, 610 6.12.2: 546 6.14.1: 361 6.15.1: 293, 514 6.15.2: 293, 557, 558 6.16.2: 178 6.16.4: 611 6.17.1: 370 6.17.2: 370 6.17.3: 370 6.17.4: 370 6.18.2: 544 6.20.2: 378 6.21.3: 586 6.22.1: 186 6.22.3: 122, 345, 626 6.24.2: 544, 545 6.26.5: 254 6.27.3: 216 6.28.2: 475 6.29.1: 180 6.29.2: 557 6.30.2: 178, 179, 185 6.32.1: 315 6.33.1: 306 6.33.3: 476, 560 6.34.4: 502 6.35.3: 593 6.36.1: 392, 517 6.36.2: 209, 214, 295 6.36.3: 300 6.37.2: 583 6.39.1: 444, 519 6.39.3: 514

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 786 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 6.40.1: 333 6.40.2: 333 6.40.3: 333 6.43.2: 563 6.45.1: 208, 294, 320, 345 6.46.3: 183, 185, 250, 354 6.47.3: 556 6.50.1: 611 6.50.2: 188 6.51.1: 273 6.53.1: 73 6.53.3: 333, 591, 592 6.54.3: 293, 558 6.56.1: 368 6.56.3: 301 6.60.1: 108, 286, 288, 406, 580, 581 6.60.2: 226 6.61.2: 295 6.62.1: 392 6.63.3: 103 6.63.4: 339, 340 6.64.3: 366, 485, 537 6.65.1: 567 6.67.2: 278 6.67.3: 419 6.68.1: 107, 228, 278, 286, 288, 406, 409, 440 6.68.3: 517 6.69.2: 293 6.70.1: 604 6.70.2: 339, 604 6.70.3: 604 6.71.1: 353, 444 6.72.2: 306, 588 6.73.3: 333 6.75.1: 556 6.76.4: 188, 196, 253, 455, 456 6.77.2: 101, 267, 391 6.78.3: 86, 332 6.79.3: 238 6.81.3: 310, 311 6.82.3: 519 6.83.1: 333 6.83.3: 494 6.85.3: 512 6.89.1: 307, 335, 336 6.91.1: 375, 599 6.91.2: 120, 122, 124, 198, 431 6.92.2: 383, 562 6.92.3: 428, 429 6.93.1: 235, 236, 535 6.100.3: 337 6.102.3: 267 6.103.2: 312, 313 6.103.3: 222, 312, 313 6.104.3: 333, 546 6.105.2: 443 6.106.1: 186, 284, 583 6.106.3: 86, 332 6.108.2: 105, 462, 546, 604 6.109.1: 399, 401 6.109.2: 401, 432, 440 6.109.3: 496 6.110.3: 467 6.111.1: 176, 443, 527, 588 6.112.2: 550 6.112.3: 367 6.113.3: 512 6.114.1: 416 6.115.1: 238 6.115.2: 192 6.116.1: 264 6.116.2: 385 6.117.1: 383, 562 6.117.3: 466 6.118.3: 585

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ787 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 6.119.3: 571 6.121.1: 354 6.122.2: 152 6.125.1: 431 6.125.2: 337 6.126.1: 513 6.126.3: 122 6.127.1: 207 6.127.3: 206 6.128.2: 174 6.128.3: 318, 550, 553 6.129.1: 232 6.132.1: 257, 259 6.133.4: 416 6.134.3: 413 6.136.2: 210, 213 6.137.2: 346 6.137.3: 386, 597 6.139.1: 432 6.141.2: 333 6.141.3: 549, 550 7.1.1: 217 7.5.1: 278 7.6.1: 523, 524 7.6.2: 183, 376, 603 7.6.3: 578 7.6.4: 308 7.7.1: 73, 291 7.7.6: 484 7.9.1: 451 7.9.2: 571 7.9.3: 470, 471 7.9.4: 296, 297 7.10.1: 311 7.11.1: 183 7.14.1: 435 7.15.1: 181 7.17.1: 315, 339 7.17.2: 315 7.17.3: 315 7.18.1: 315, 428, 440, 457, 469 7.18.2: 457, 469 7.21.1: 474 7.26.3: 228 7.26.4: 233 7.26.7: 428, 429 7.28.1: 452 7.31.1: 324, 346 7.32.1: 333 7.33.1: 333 7.35.3: 508 7.38.3: 482, 500 7.38.5: 378 7.40.2: 236 7.43.2: 172 7.43.3: 172 7.45.1: 189, 335-337 7.46.2: 192, 193, 250, 365 7.46.3: 561 7.49.1: 306 7.49.2: 186, 188 7.50.1: 193 7.50.7: 531 7.50.9: 192 7.51.1: 333 7.52.2: 282 7.53.3: 313 7.55.1: 511, 529, 530 7.56.6: 435 7.57.1: 293 7.58.1: 548 7.60.2: 546 7.60.4: 507 7.60.6: 326 7.60.7: 237 7.62.7: 237 7.63.1: 455, 456

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 788 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 7.64.1: 580 7.65.1: 293 7.66.1: 163, 582 7.67.1: 315 7.72.2: 224, 619 7.72.3: 443 7.73.4: 445 7.73.5: 490, 546 7.73.6: 102, 106, 148, 191, 194, 394 7.73.7: 122, 264 7.73.10: 346, 565, 588 7.73.11: 522 7.74.2: 399 7.74.3: 351 7.74.4: 245 7.79.2: 120, 124, 430, 440 7.81.1: 295 7.81.3: 211 7.81.4: 315, 536, 537 7.82.1: 430, 431 7.82.3: 354 7.83.3: 391, 597 7.83.4: 354 7.85.1: 364, 377 7.87.1: 186 7.91.1: 333 7.92.1: 203, 315, 570 7.93.1: 372, 373 7.94.1: 332 7.95.2: 601 7.97.3: 235, 236, 535 7.97.4: 406 7.97.6: 485, 510 7.99.1: 366, 371 7.115.2: 323 7.102.1: 493 7.104.1: 168, 473 7.107.1: 183 7.109.2: 232, 233 7.109.3: 253 7.109.6: 527 7.110.1: 544 7.115.2: 323 7.115.4: 580 7.117.1: 205 8.1.20: 464, 465, 495 8.2.6: 379, 485 8.2.17: 343 8.2.21: 193, 443 8.3.1: 193, 452, 472 8.3.7: 193 8.3.10: 532 8.3.14: 298 8.3.16: 458 8.3.26: 143, 283, 389 8.4.1: 298, 548 8.4.6: 229, 404, 470 8.4.8: 390, 595 8.4.10: 365, 368, 524, 525 8.4.18: 532 8.4.21: 568 8.4.23: 507 8.5.9: 436 8.5.11: 382 8.6.1: 466 8.6.2: 298 8.6.3: 582 8.6.4: 466 8.6.5: 523 8.6.9: 517 8.6.10: 188 8.6.11: 457 8.6.12: 300 8.6.13: 521 8.6.14: 361, 362 8.6.16: 557

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ789 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 8.6.17: 202, 270, 419 8.6.18: 376, 568 8.6.19: 319 8.6.21: 179, 183 8.6.23: 517 8.6.26: 517, 518, 556 8.7.1: 253 8.7.2: 342 8.7.6: 379, 485 8.7.8: 464 8.7.20: 338, 346 8.8.4: 333 8.8.19: 452, 580 8.8.22: 202, 514, 514 8.8.23: 362 8.9.1: 185 8.9.2: 206 8.9.8: 102, 106, 191, 194, 264, 394 8.9.9: 220, 221, 270, 559 8.9.10: 302 8.9.12: 329 8.9.13: 188 8.9.14: 363, 365 8.9.15: 160, 203 8.9.16: 174, 304 8.9.17: 272 8.9.20: 102, 105, 106, 188, 191, 194, 267, 307, 394 8.9.21: 599, 600 8.9.22: 191 8.10.4: 415, 437 8.10.12: 319 8.10.21: 520 8.10.29: 556 8.10.33: 582 8.12.2: 254 9.1.1: 337 9.1.3: 67, 235 9.1.6: 187 9.1.9: 403 9.1.19: 293 9.2.5: 458, 490 9.2.7: 333 9.2.13: 597 9.2.25: 352, 532 9.3.1: 154 9.3.2: 470 9.3.10: 579 9.3.17: 103 9.3.21: 375, 599 9.3.22: 312 9.4.2: 333 9.4.4: 611 9.4.11: 415 9.4.13: 399 9.4.14: 563 9.4.17: 187, 199, 338 9.4.19: 406 9.4.23: 474 9.5.4: 314, 518 9.5.6: 336, 562 9.5.8: 232 9.5.10: 338 9.5.16: 455, 497 9.5.17: 389 9.5.19: 532 9.5.25: 253 9.5.26: 253 9.5.32: 542 9.5.33: 542 9.5.34: 542 9.5.35: 542 9.5.36: 542 9.5.37: 485, 510, 511 9.6.1: 231, 299, 357 9.6.2: 371, 451

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 790 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 9.6.4: 457 9.6.5: 457 9.6.11: 541 9.6.12: 202 9.6.14: 211 9.6.15: 494 9.6.18: 188, 200, 259, 260 9.6.19: 563 9.6.22: 493, 496 9.6.24: 235 9.6.31: 174 9.6.40: 363 9.6.43: 317 9.6.46: 195, 255, 308, 402, 403, 454 9.6.53: 505 9.6.54: 482, 500, 505 9.7.1: 207 9.7.8: 206 9.7.19: 309 9.8.9: 323 9.8.14: 416 9.8.15: 416 9.8.16: 416 9.8.20: 207 9.9.2: 360, 361, 503 9.9.4: 120, 124, 197, 431, 546 9.9.10: 199, 386, 597 9.9.15: 340, 341, 462, 604 9.9.16: 518 9.9.20: 401 9.10.1: 302, 365, 523, 556, 587 9.10.10: 122 9.10.12: 434 9.10.14: 193 9.10.19: 360 9.10.21: 187, 536, 602 9.10.24: 267 9.10.25: 522 9.10.26: 103, 514 9.14.4: 122 9.14.4: 122 9.14.20: 399 10.1.2: 105, 462, 604 10.1.5: 468, 470, 600 10.1.8: 416 10.1.10: 420 10.1.13: 386, 596 10.1.14: 159 10.1.15: 406 10.1.16: 307 10.1.18: 245 10.1.25: 225 10.1.26: 388 10.1.29: 282 10.2.1: 179, 218, 405 10.2.3: 444 10.2.4: 168, 169, 185, 186, 193 10.2.8: 446 10.2.11: 298 10.2.13: 537, 538 10.2.20: 389 10.2.28: 142, 188, 200, 212, 213, 248, 249, 259-261, 504, 623 10.2.31: 375, 599 10.2.33: 178 10.3.2: 458 10.3.13: 284 10.3.14: 293 10.3.15: 293 10.4.2: 205, 206 10.4.5: 206, 434 10.4.8: 142, 368 10.4.16: 548 10.4.21: 511, 529 10.4.23: 377

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ791 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 10.4.24: 299 10.4.25: 596 10.5.7: 309 10.5.22: 587 10.5.29: 571 10.5.32: 377 10.5.36: 359, 360 10.6.1: 309 10.6.2: 355 10.6.5: 538 10.6.19: 508 10.6.20: 309 10.6.31: 86, 245, 332, 334 10.6.35: 245 10.7.6: 219, 577, 626 10.7.15: 486 10.7.25: 336, 503 10.7.33: 464 10.7.42: 577, 626 10.7.43: 473 10.8.2: 559 10.8.10: 416, 418 10.8.13: 474 10.8.18: 250, 454 10.8.19: 559 10.8.24: 308 10.8.27: 103 10.8.39: 522 10.8.41: 447 10.8.43: 321 10.9.1: 437 10.9.3: 205 10.9.12: 367 10.10.6: 551 10.10.18: 123 10.10.19: 581 10.10.23: 129 10.10.25: 496 10.10.29: 512 11.1.1: 419, 611 11.1.2: 270 11.1.5: 176 11.1.6: 333 11.1.10: 485 11.1.12: 346 11.1.20: 474 11.1.22: 346 11.1.30: 122 11.1.34: 541 11.1.35: 559 11.1.36: 482, 483, 500, 506 11.2.2: 402 11.2.9: 65, 525, 526 11.2.12: 428, 440 11.2.13: 440 11.2.14: 548 11.2.25: 231 11.2.29: 460, 591, 592 11.3.1: 419 11.3.6: 493, 496 11.3.9: 192, 197, 250 11.3.18: 122 11.3.26: 259-261, 504, 505 11.3.27: 259, 260, 504, 505 11.3.28: 505 11.4.8: 559 11.4.9: 228 11.4.10: 558 11.4.14: 559 11.4.22: 375, 599 11.4.23: 444 11.5.2: 270 11.5.3: 120, 124, 183, 430, 491 11.5.11: 219 11.6.5: 318, 553 11.6.14: 231, 299, 357 11.6.19: 392

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 792 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 11.6.21: 210 11.7.1: 277 11.7.3: 192, 206 11.7.5: 496 11.7.10: 329 11.7.11: 551, 584 11.7.13: 588 11.7.26: 582 11.8.1: 107, 285-6, 288, 406 11.8.4: 541 11.8.7: 514 11.8.22: 186 11.9.10: 382 11.9.14: 432, 440 11.9.15: 328, 446, 452, 581 11.9.22: 293 11.9.24: 293 11.10.8: 382 11.10.16: 309 11.10.19: 452 11.10.25: 493 11.10.26: 376, 568 12.1.1: 333 12.1.7: 557 12.1.22: 494 12.1.25: 239 12.1.26: 232 12.1.30: 308 12.1.31: 553 12.1.33: 482, 502, 547 12.1.38: 158 12.1.43: 333 12.1.47: 560 12.1.48: 456 12.1.51: 294, 596 12.1.54: 350, 374, 570 12.1.55: 523, 524 12.1.63: 314, 483 12.2.2: 541 12.2.3: 557 12.2.4: 367, 600 12.2.8: 470 12.2.9: 213 12.2.12: 338 12.2.16: 331 12.2.26: 446 12.2.29: 65, 525, 526 12.2.42: 331 12.2.45: 343, 344 12.2.51: 538 12.2.54: 179 12.3.10: 284 12.3.12: 93 12.3.14: 177 12.3.21: 298 12.3.26: 337 12.3.28: 523 12.3.30: 282 12.3.33: 405 12.3.35: 596 12.3.36: 563 12.3.37: 482, 500 12.3.39: 91, 329, 539 12.3.41: 473 12.3.43: 143, 283, 285, 389 12.3.52: 538 12.3.55: 619 12.4.11: 490 12.4.16: 587 12.4.18: 319 12.4.29: 233, 234, 330-332 12.4.30: 233, 234, 253 12.4.35: 535 12.4.36: 390, 595 12.4.42: 248, 249, 259, 260 12.5.7: 266 12.5.24: 581

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ793 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 12.5.34: 563 12.5.44: 275 12.5.48: 473 12.5.50: 259, 260 12.5.64: 391 13.1.1: 580 13.1.4: 312, 313 13.1.5: 313 13.1.16: 185 13.1.19: 556 13.1.22: 372 13.1.25: 573 13.1.26: 336 13.1.34: 85, 120 13.1.35: 352 13.1.37: 219 13.1.46: 203 13.1.47: 219 13.1.52: 203 13.2.3: 218, 219, 503 13.2.5: 293 13.2.13: 223 13.2.14: 358, 528, 586 13.2.18: 293 13.2.20: 181, 397 13.2.21: 293 13.2.24: 188 13.2.26: 328 13.2.28: 174, 219 13.2.29: 188, 208, 293 13.2.33: 206 13.2.36: 570 13.2.37: 337 13.2.39: 188 13.2.46: 372, 469 13.3.3: 558, 559 13.3.11: 219 13.3.19: 512 13.4.1: 338 13.4.5: 108, 142, 286, 288, 406, 407, 620 13.4.10: 512 13.4.25: 440 13.4.28: 217 13.4.41: 407 13.4.44: 163 13.4.47: 339 13.7.7: 338 13.7.16: 199 14.1.1: 282, 563 14.1.3: 231, 533 14.1.8: 185 14.1.12: 522 14.1.18: 332 14.1.23: 295 14.1.27: 206 14.1.29: 174, 517, 547, 556, 579, 580 14.1.36: 359, 360 14.1.41: 332, 485 14.1.42: 556 14.1.43: 358, 587 14.1.44: 300, 434 14.1.45: 293 14.1.55: 293 14.1.57: 253 14.2.2: 338, 437 14.2.6: 487 14.2.9: 360, 361, 434 14.2.10: 293 14.2.12: 296, 475 14.2.14: 321 14.2.17: 296 14.2.20: 332 14.2.26: 434 14.2.33: 366 14.2.34: 285

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 794 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 14.2.37: 219 14.3.43: 550 14.2.44: 296 14.2.48: 103 14.2.61: 277 14.2.63: 437 14.2.72: 388 14.2.73: 434 14.19.2: 366 15.1.8: 103 15.2.1: 174, 238, 289, 371, 491, 495 15.2.2: 495 15.2.3: 495 15.2.4: 495 15.2.6: 578 15.3.2: 420, 427 15.6.4: 484 15.6.7: 181, 194 15.8.1: 420, 427 15.10.2: 237 15.10.6: 622 15.10.7: 411, 622 15.11.2: 192, 197, 483 15.12.1: 501, 563 15.12.7: 490 15.13.1: 381 15.13.12: 403 15.14.7: 497 15.14.8: 496 15.15.7: 108, 286, 288, 406 15.18.3: 420, 427 15.18.4: 219 16.2.1: 491 16.3.5: 467 16.4.6: 308 16.6.6: 339 16.6.9: 582 16.7.6: 331 16.7.11: 317 16.9.1: 359 17.1.1: 237 17.1.2: 237 17.1.3: 237 17.1.4: 237 17.1.5: 237 17.1.9: 352 17.1.22: 494 17.1.25: 317 18.1.1: 188, 224, 225 18.1.3: 220, 221 18.1.4: 270 18.1.5: 405, 468 18.1.10: 380, 381 18.1.11: 188 18.1.16: 364, 377, 603, 604 18.1.20: 163, 446 18.1.21: 392 18.1.23: 307 18.1.24: 228 18.1.30: 401 18.1.31: 550, 665 18.1.32: 216, 217, 312 18.1.33: 281, 365, 368 18.1.37: 364, 377, 603 18.1.39: 216, 217 18.1.42: 220, 221 18.1.43: 421 18.1.45: 325, 605 18.1.46: 532 18.1.48: 346 18.1.49: 177, 235, 236, 535 18.1.51: 325, 367, 605 18.1.54: 465, 466 18.1.55: 318 18.1.61: 338 18.2.3: 343

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ795 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 18.2.4: 208, 384, 592 18.2.6: 258, 302 18.2.12: 367 18.2.13: 293, 462 18.2.18: 293 18.2.23: 392 18.2.25: 296 18.2.28: 352 18.2.31: 387, 610 18.2.32: 319 18.2.34: 564 18.2.36: 270 18.2.46: 537 18.2.49: 340, 341 18.2.54: 501, 596 18.3.5: 401 18.3.7: 377, 604 18.3.14: 226 18.3.15: 188, 567 18.3.16: 381, 567 18.3.17: 393 18.3.21: 391, 392, 393, 514 18.3.23: 204 18.3.38: 229 18.3.44: 226, 227, 231, 299, 357, 363, 365 18.3.46: 340, 341 18.3.47: 177 18.3.50: 177 18.3.51: 177 18.3.55: 382 18.3.59: 340, 341 18.3.61: 517 18.3.63: 245, 381 18.3.67: 460 18.3.70: 314 18.3.71: 270 18.4.1: 467 18.4.2: 330, 404 18.4.5: 300 18.4.14: 400 18.4.17: 103 18.4.37: 400, 409, 440 18.4.40: 159, 470, 600 18.4.50: 482, 483, 500, 506 18.4.51: 157 18.4.54: 381 18.4.59: 204, 274, 280 18.4.60: 468 18.4.63: 465 18.4.64: 103 18.4.67: 366 18.4.78: 367, 582 18.4.89: 399, 401 19.2.1: 404, 495 19.2.3: 545 19.3.1: 337 19.6.5: 286 19.6.8: 293 19.6.14: 183 19.7.2: 206 19.9.12: 548, 549 19.9.14: 168 19.10.10: 168 19.13.1: 186 19.13.8: 293 19.17: 465 19.17.6: 377 19.18.6: 377 19.19: 465 19.20.2: 338 19.26.3: 293 19.32.7: 293, 365 19.36.4: 293 19.37.1: 195, 402, 403 19.38.4: 612 19.39.1: 336

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 796 Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya (cont.) 19.39.4: 382 19.39.5: 336 19.42.2: 564 19.44.3: 207 19.44.5: 338, 346 19.47.8: 308 19.50.4: 293 19.58.4: 467 19.59.2: 293 19.59.3: 122 19.60.2: 435 20.1.1: 616 20.4.1: 617 20.6.2: 619, 627 20.6.3: 627 20.11.1: 590 20.15.4: 578 20.18.3: 181 20.19.6: 590 20.31.2: 180 20.34.4: 142 20.35.2: 350 20.35.3: 172 20.35.5: 199 20.37.1: 596 20.38.5: 206 20.46.1: 236 20.48.4: 181 20.51.1: 195, 402, 403 20.53.1: 122, 174 20.53.3: 210 20.54.2: 172 20.57.11: 122 20.61.6: 142, 190 20.67.1: 583, 587 20.67.2: 588 20.67.6: 174 20.68.11: 583 20.73.6: 239, 589 20.88.1: 583 20.89.2: 596 20.95.2: 226 20.101.3: 678 20.113.2: 628 20.116.2: 188 20.117.1: 628 20.126.16: 206 20.126.22: 206 20.127.7: 293 20.127.9: 186, 192, 197, 198 20.128.4: 293 20.128.5: 293 20.129.7: 231 20.135.2: 104 20.135.3: 104 20.136.15: 293 Atharvavidhāna 3 Bare, James 43-45, 49, 141, 153 Baudhāyanaśrautasūtra 206 Bender, Ernest 276, 418 Bhagavadgītā 244, 427 Bhāgavatapurāṇa 632 Bhārgava-Bhāskara 13, 14, 75-77, 88, 92-94, (passim) Bhartr̥hari 46, 480 Bhāṣikasūtra 38 Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita 13, 14, 75, 77, 471, 639, 649, 657, 664, 669, 676-679 Bhāvasena Traividyadeva 634, 673 Bhoja 650 Böhtlingk, Otto 115, 165, 167, 289, 319, 400 Bolling, G.M. 131, 135, 141 Bopp, F. 290 Br̥hacchabdenduśekhara 57, 643 Br̥haddevatā 497, 647

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ797 Bronkhorst, Johannes 33 BÜhler, Georg 3 Burrow, Thomas 441, 442 CA, see: Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā CAB, see: Caturādhyāyībhāṣya Candrakīrti (on Sārasvata- vyākaraṇa) 687 Cāndravyākaraṇa 652, 677 Cardona, George 44, 45, 49, 55, 58, 61, 81, 99, 116, 117, 119, 139, 228, 246, 264, 421, 524, 539, 608, 635, 657 Caturādhyāyībhāṣya (CAB) 13, 14, 26, 41, 42, 58, 62, 64, 65, 70-77, 79, 85-88, 90-94 (passim) Chandaḥsūtra 187-189, 643, 658 Chāndogya-Upaniṣad 34, 111 2.22.2: 111 2.22.5: 34 Chatterji, K.C. 114, 633, 645, 646, 654 Chāya (on Uddyota) 2 Citrācārya, Jagadīśācārya 120 Dantyoṣṭhyavidhi 138, 631 Debrunner, Albert. 158, 247, 248, 255, 495 DelbrÜck, Berthold 247 Deshpande, Madhav M. 35, 40, 43-45, 50, 53, 55, 58, 61, 116, 118, 119, 126, 141, 144, 151, 153, 154, 246, 264, 402, 412, 451, 465, 479, 639, 640, 646, 649, 658-660, 674 Durga (on Kātantra) 660 Durga (on NR) 528 Fry, A.H. 90, 306, 334 Gaṇeś Bhaṭ Dādā 88 Gārgya 88, 106 Gāyatrībrāhmaṇa 206 Ghatage, A.M. 189, 395 Ghosh, Manomohan 161, 162 Gobhilagr̥hyasūtra 167 Gopālayajvan 64, 66 Gopathabrāhmaṇa 98, 633 Grammont 134 Haridīkṣita 657 Heffner, R-M. S. 176, 184 Hock, H.H. 130 Hrasva Māṇḍūkeya 34, 35, 36, 146 Hueckstedt, Robert 45, 49, 55, 56, 246, 410 Jaiminīyabrāhmaṇa 318, 332 Jaṭāpāṭha 61 Jha, Vasishth Narayan 61, 65 Joshi, S.D. 46, 508 Kaiyaṭa 395, 405, 414 Kāṇvaśuklayajurvedasaṃhitā 186, 188, 195, 203, 206, 228, 665 Kāśikāvr̥tti (KV) 14, 55, 70, 73, 74, 79, 91, 101, 143, 168, 169, 180, 183, 221-223, 226, 229, 242, 247, 265, 267, 272, 278, 280, 283, 285, 290, 291, 307, 320, 331, 351, 358, 366, 369, 375, 379, 383, 389, 395, 397, 402, 404, 407, 408, 411, 412- 414, 417-420, 431, 452, 453, 455, 456, 461, 467, 472, 496, 501, 534, 641, 661, 664, 665, 676, 677, 684 Kātantrarūpamālāvyākaraṇa 634, 673 Kātantravyākaraṇa 634, 652, 660, 673 Kāṭhakabrāhmaṇasaṃkalana 206

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 798 Kāṭhakasaṃhitā 188, 203, 207, 279, 456 Kaṭhasaṃhitā 188, 203, 207 Katre, S.L. 4, 11 Katre, S.M. 168 Kātyāyana 46, 52, 53, 413-415, 480, 521, 540, 549, 572, 640, 658, 660, 671, 674 Kautsavyākaraṇa 4, 7, 8, 10, 13, 77, 79, 92, 210, 233, 422, 545, 630, 631 (passim) Keśava Bhaṭ 88, 577 Kiparsky, Paul 49, 55, 265, 267 Kr̥ṣṇadāsa 75, 77, 92, 187, 320, 407, 631 (passim) Kṣīrasvāmin 464 Kṣīrataraṅiṇī 464 Kuddala, Shivadatta 2 Kumārasambhava 657 KV, see: Kāśikāvr̥tti Ladefoged, Peter 118 Laghuśabdaratna 657, 680 Laghuśabdenduśekhara 643, 657, 670 Laghusiddhāntakaumudī 148 Lanman, C.R. 207, 260, 271, 307, 330, 394, 395, 465, 558 Macdonell, A. 269, 482 Mādhyandinaśuklayajurveda- saṃhitā 186, 188, 195, 203, 206, 566 Mahābhāṣya (MB) 2, 35, 46, 56, 61, 62, 80, 81, 101, 148, 149, 153, 161, 163, 199, 203, 204, 205, 207, 215, 216, 226, 244, 256, 376, 395, 405, 411, 413- 415, 427, 479, 489, 508, 512, 540, 572, 574, 634, 649, 656, 658, 676, 684 Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā (MS) 115, 186, 188, 195, 203, 207, 247, 465 Mallinātha 657 Māṇḍūkīśikṣā 3, 14, 77, 79, 122, 123, 145, 147, 149, 424, 425, 572, 574 Mantrabrāhmaṇa 169 MB, see: Mahābhāṣya Mehendale, M.A. 222 Mishra, R.C. 92 MS, see: Maitrāyaṇīsaṃhitā Mugdhabodhavyākaraṇa 634 MÜller, Max 100, 118, 252, 572 Muralīdharamiśra 657 Nāgeśabhaṭṭa 2, 46, 57, 643, 657, 670 Nāradaśikṣā 37, 138 Negelein, J. 131, 135, 141 Nighaṇṭu 397 Nirukta (NR) 31, 37, 98, 115, 226, 400, 455, 464, 479, 528, 562, 632, 647 1.1: 528 1.9: 647 1.12: 226 1.13: 528 1.17: 37, 98 2.1: 562 2.13: 528 3.1: 528 3.19: 464 5.4: 455 9.5: 400 7.10: 115 10.34: 115 13.13: 632 NR, see: Nirukta Nyāsa (on Kāśikāvr̥tti) 369, 467, 534

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ799 Nyāyasūtra 647 Oldenberg, Hermann 80 Padamañjarī (on Kāśikāvr̥tti) 467 Padapāṭha 60, 61, 65-67, 81, 93, 98, 99, 102, (passim) Pañcasandhi 7, 13, 75, 77-79 Pāṇḍeya, Rāmājñā 161, 638 Pandeya, Vijay Shankar 170 Pandit, S.P. 88, 92, 207, 275, 577 Pāṇini 2, 14, 37, 38, 46, 50-53, 55, 56-58, 62-81, 87, 89, 91, 93, 99, 100, (passim) 1.1.2: 647 1.1.6: 376 1.1.7: 182, 645 1.1.8: 141 1.1.9: 51, 70, 113, 126, 141, 146, 149, 156, 276, 412, 635, 636, 638, 639, 645 1.1.10: 2, 52, 57, 58, 78, 148, 149, 154, 639, 646 1.1.11: 68, 218, 405, 665 1.1.12: 222, 223 1.1.13: 221 1.1.14: 224, 225, 641, 647 1.1.16: 81, 227, 229, 665 1.1.17: 68, 215, 225 1.1.18: 215, 225 1.1.19: 68, 69, 216, 218, 664 1.1.27: 649 1.1.37: 319, 497 1.1.41: 224 1.1.43: 69 1.1.45: 536 1.1.46: 649 1.1.47: 454 1.1.49: 164, 176, 649 1.1.50: 55, 56, 211, 246, 277 1.1.51: 199 1.1.56: 210, 651 1.1.64: 657, 662 1.1.65: 68, 69, 241 1.1.66: 649 1.1.67: 649 1.1.68: 53 1.1.69: 51, 56, 574, 639, 649 1.1.70: 46, 51, 70 1.1.73: 556 1.2.17: 656 1.2.27: 197, 643 1.2.29: 75, 643 1.2.30: 75, 643 1.2.31: 75, 643 1.2.32: 76, 124, 125, 643 1.2.39: 445 1.2.40: 173, 441, 447 1.2.41: 214, 641 1.2.45: 454, 479, 648 1.2.46: 454, 479 1.2.64: 78, 652 1.3.1: 479, 647 1.3.2: 641 1.3.3: 78, 639 1.3.10: 55, 56, 251 1.3.13: 71 1.3.14: 91, 143, 283 1.4.2: 653 1.4.3: 433 1.4.9: 512 1.4.10: 642 1.4.11: 642 1.4.12: 642 1.4.14: 647 1.4.42: 635 1.4.56: 226 1.4.57: 479, 496 1.4.58: 226, 479 1.4.59: 226, 479, 492, 648

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 800 Pāṇini (cont.) 1.4.60: 481, 492, 495, 648 1.4.61: 481, 496 1.4.62: 481, 496 1.4.63: 481 1.4.64: 481, 494 1.4.65: 481, 497 1.4.66: 481 1.4.67: 481, 495 1.4.68: 481, 494 1.4.69: 481, 494 1.4.70: 481 1.4.71: 481, 495 1.4.72: 481 1.4.73: 481 1.4.74: 481, 495 1.4.75: 481 1.4.76: 481 1.4.77: 481, 494 1.4.78: 481 1.4.79: 481 1.4.84: 81 1.4.93: 501 1.4.96: 634 1.4.101: 113 1.4.104: 455 1.4.109: 46 2.1.1: 489, 502 2.1.2: 508 2.1.4: 508, 540 2.1.17: 414 2.1.58: 62, 101 2.4.2: 137 2.4.34: 457 2.4.40: 534 3.1.6: 67, 89, 234 3.1.9: 539 3.1.93: 71, 649 3.1.134: 653 3.2.3: 543 3.2.67: 543 3.2.74: 543 3.2.83 3.2.88: 71, 534 3.2.107: 236, 534 3.2.171: 71, 534, 3.2.174: 544 3.3.57: 464 3.4.101: 55 4.1.2: 70, 509 4.1.31: 380 4.1.45: 223 4.1.76: 68 4.4.128: 68 4.4.142: 68, 519 4.1.43: 519 4.4.143: 519 5.1.123: 612, 613 5.2.37: 521 5.2.39: 68, 547 5.2.94: 71, 517, 526 5.3.22: 521 5.3.37: 677 5.3.69: 66, 527 5.3.92: 516 5.3.93: 516 5.4.17: 65 5.4.21: 526 5.4.67: 496 5.4.129: 250 6.1.7: 71, 589 6.1.39: 676 6.1.65: 456 6.1.67: 68 6.1.68: 223 6.1.73: 399 6.1.74: 399 6.1.75: 399, 673

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ801 Pāṇini (cont.) 6.1.76: 399, 673 6.1.77: 56, 246, 247, 410, 431 6.1.78: 411, 654 6.1.79: 654, 655 6.1.84: 68, 412, 414, 453 6.1.85: 656 6.1.87: 414 6.1.88: 408, 418, 419, 661 6.1.89: 414, 660-662 6.1.90: 69, 418 6.1.91: 68, 417 6.1.92: 660 6.1.94: 413, 657, 661, 662 6.1.95: 408, 662 6.1.101: 68, 74, 412, 658 6.1.109: 663 6.1.115: 68, 420, 421, 663 6.1.122: 654, 663 6.1.123: 655 6.1.124: 655 6.1.125: 68. 623, 624 6.1.128: 415 6.1.129: 199, 248, 624, 667 6.1.132: 681, 685 6.1.133: 63, 102 6.1.134: 686 6.1.137: 676, 677 6.1.138: 677 6.1.157: 560, 682 6.1.193: 519 6.1.197: 68 6.1.223: 68 6.2.49: 481 6.2.139: 481 6.3.14: 62, 101 6.3.23: 684 6.3.25: 549 6.3.26: 549 6.3.67: 495 6.3.78: 654 6.3.90: 569 6.3.91: 547, 569 6.3.109: 327, 465, 682 6.3.110: 544 6.3.111: 72, 99, 278, 279, 283 6.3.112: 379 6.3.113: 379 6.3.116: 376 6.3.124: 383 6.3.125: 375 6.3.128:381 6.3.129: 381 6.3.130: 381 6.3.132: 378 6.3.134: 68, 377 6.4.4: 543 6.4.16: 234 6.4.64: 534 6.4.71: 591 6.4.74: 591 6.4.75: 591 6.4.78: 71, 589 6.4.88: 536 6.4.100: 534 6.4.132: 662 6.4.143: 516 6.4.148: 521 7.1.1: 641 7.1.36: 237, 238 7.1.37: 331 7.1.39: 216 7.1.72: 299, 454 7.2.7: 642 7.2.67: 534 7.3.55: 68 7.3.73: 55 7.3.103: 68

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 802 Pāṇini (cont.) 7.4.83: 71, 589 8.1.41: 574 8.1.71: 482 8.2.1: 408, 471, 505, 637, 639, 640, 648, 679 8.2.7: 666 8.2.9: 242, 387, 546 8.2.18: 67, 69, 161, 202-204, 207 8.2.23: 395, 397, 652 8.2.30: 250 8.2.31: 72, 99, 278 8.2.32: 245 8.2.39: 264, 265, 269 8.2.40: 72, 99, 278 8.2.41: 99, 307 8.2.66: 73, 242, 680 8.2.67: 530 8.2.68: 318 8.2.69: 684 8.2.70: 319, 320, 684, 685 8.2.71: 319, 320 8.2.82: 505, 665 8.2.83: 666 8.2.84: 665 8.2.85: 666 8.2.86: 161, 199, 642, 666, 667 8.2.88: 666 8.2.89: 666 8.2.91: 666 8.2.92: 666 8.2.93: 666 8.2.94: 666 8.2.95: 666 8.2.96: 666 8.2.97: 249, 504, 666 8.2.98: 666 8.2.99: 666 8.2.100: 641, 666 8.2.101: 666 8.2.102: 666 8.2.105: 164, 641 8.2.106: 164, 166 8.3.1: 68 8.3.2: 534 8.3.4: 189, 676 8.3.6: 289, 290, 676, 682 8.3.7: 74, 291, 534, 677 8.3.8: 534 8.3.10: 677 8.3.11: 678 8.3.13: 72, 99, 278, 279, 283 8.3.14: 158, 389, 653 8.3.15: 310, 314, 680 8.3.17: 682 8.3.18: 125, 146, 287, 652 8.3.19: 81, 285, 287, 652 8.3.23: 408, 673 8.3.24: 208, 471 8.3.26: 674 8.3.27: 674 8.3.28: 73, 181, 183, 271, 272, 671 8.3.29: 73, 181, 183, 272, 670 8.3.30: 73, 181, 183, 271, 272 8.3.31: 181, 272 8.3.32: 180, 397 8.3.34: 676 8.3.35: 680 8.3.36: 73, 183, 680 8.3.38: 169, 683 8.3.41: 331 8.3.43: 683 8.3.44: 683 8.3.45: 683 8.3.48: 680, 682 8.3.55: 349

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ803 Pāṇini (cont.) 8.3.56: 349, 374 8.3.57: 69, 349, 355, 357, 359 8.3.58: 356, 357 8.3.59: 256, 355, 357 8.3.63: 359 8.3.65: 358 8.3.73: 371 8.3.74: 371 8.3.75: 371 8.3.76: 369 8.3.82: 363 8.3.86: 167, 168, 169 8.3.88: 366 8.3.92: 362 8.3.97: 362 8.3.98: 366 8.3.99: 74 8.3.101: 350, 351 8.3.103: 352 8.3.106: 356, 364 8.3.107: 364 8.3.108: 369, 370 8.3.110: 368, 372 8.4.1: 451, 452, 456, 471, 472, 475 8.4.2: 69, 451, 456, 474, 475 8.4.3: 452 8.4.7: 453 8.4.11: 68, 454-456 8.4.14: 331, 453, 456, 600 8.4.15: 468, 600 8.4.16: 600 8.4.22: 472, 473 8.4.24: 675 8.4.26: 467 8.4.27: 459, 461, 463 8.4.28: 459-461 8.4.36: 472 8.4.37: 471 8.4.38: 475 8.4.39: 89, 473 8.4.40: 247, 250, 278 8.4.41: 72, 73, 278, 354 8.4.42: 280 8.4.45: 62, 72, 101, 267, 407, 408, 669, 670 8.4.46: 195, 196, 394, 403 8.4.47: 394-396 8.4.48: 269, 394, 671 8.4.49: 394, 404 8.4.50: 394, 402 8.4.51: 394, 396, 652 8.4.52: 394 8.4.53: 55, 264 8.4.55: 266 8.4.56: 69, 75, 107, 265 8.4.57: 212 8.4.58: 69, 408, 471 8.4.60: 276, 672 8.4.61: 282, 672 8.4.62: 269, 670, 671 8.4.68: 52, 156, 638 Pāṇinīyadhātupāṭha 148, 223, 250, 456, 464 Pāṇinīyaśikṣā 14, 37, 43, 50, 54, 71, 74, 75, 77, 79, 129, 131, 142, 144, 149, 152, 161, 197, 636, 638, 640, 642, 644 Pañjikā (on Pāṇinīyaśikṣā) 161 Pāraskaragr̥hyasūtra 167 Paribhāṣenduśekhara 149, 634, 646 Pāriśikṣā 423 Patañjali 35, 46, 49, 50, 56, 57, 61, 80, 101, 116, 121, 149, 153, 163, 199, 203, 204, 207, 215, 244, 249, 256, 327, 376, 395,

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 804 405, 411, 413, 479, 480, 512, 540, 574, 640, 649, 662 Pauṣkarasādi 269, 671 PAV, see: Atharvaveda, Paippalāda Pāyaguṇḍe, Vaidyanātha 2 Phiṭsūtra 64, 481 Pike, Kenneth 128 Piṅgala 187, 189, 643, 658 Pradīpa (on Mahābhāṣya) 376, 405 Prakāśa (on Prakriyākaumudī) 657, 660, 662, 676 Prakriyākaumudī 657, 660-663, 676 Pratiśākhya (generic ref.) 2, 3, 31, 38, 39, 47, 48, 50-52, 54, 59, 60, 62-66, 77, 80, 83, 84, (passim) Prātiśākhyajyotsnā 77 Prātiśākhyapradīpaśikṣā 492 Prauḍhamanoramā 657, 670, 679 Puṇyarāja 634, 635 Rai, Ram Kumar 192 Rāmacandra Śeṣa 657 Raśmi (on Prakāśa on Prakriyā- kaumudī) 657 Ratate, Narayan Shastri 4 Ratnākara 657 Regnier, M. 252 Renou, Louis 167, 241, 455, 591 R̥gveda (RV) 35, 38, 63, 74, 80, 87, 145, 162, 166, 169, 175, 177, 179, 186, 193, 195, 198, 200, 206, 213, 216, 217, 220, 221, 226, 228, 311, 319, 320, 328, 351, 354, 388, 404, 420, 464, 476, 482, 506, 509, 538, 545, 551, 559, 561, 565, 566, 568, 576, 592, 593, 602, 604, 632, 633, 653, 663-665, 678, 679, 681, 682, 685, 686 1.2.1: 665, 681 1.2.2: 681 1.2.5: 228, 681 1.2.6: 681 1.2.8: 681 1.2.9: 681 1.10.1: 681 1.12.3: 678 1.15.5: 678 1.18.2: 551 1.24.8: 568 1.27.1: 206 1.32.15: 686 1.34.4: 509 1.36.20: 506 1.38.3: 226 1.44.9: 685 1.46.6: 221 1.49.4: 685 1.60.1: 509 1.83.1: 509 1.85.7: 663 1.186.6: 561 1.116.21: 328 1.164.21: 602 2.13.6: 186 2.13.9: 509 2.24.1: 686 2.33.4: 545 2.39.2: 665 3.9.2: 175 3.19.1: 186 4.2.6: 678 4.9.2: 509 4.9.8: 653 4.25.6: 509 4.26.5: 509

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ805 R̥gveda (cont.) 4.35.7: 311 4.49.4: 221 4.50.8: 686 4.51.5: 482 5.28.3: 565 5.29.13: 226 5.51.5: 228 5.62.5: 195 5.99.7: 228 6.28.1: 220 6.70.1: 664 6.75.4: 664 7.1.5: 506 7.55.3: 328 7.66.16: 193, 198 7.96.4: 388 7.104.6: 404 7.104.23: 506 8.1.20: 179 8.19.5: 633 8.33.9: 354 8.49.20: 506 8.56.4: 226 8.100.10: 632 9.3.10: 682 9.6.2: 665 9.12.3: 216, 217, 664 9.52.4: 681 9.66.16: 681 9.69.10: 681 9.83.1: 685 9.96.12: 166 9.100.11: 632 10.10.3: 220 10.10.14: 604 10.16.1: 592 10.17.8: 220 10.32.3: 74, 81, 351 10.34.11: 195 10.36.14: 177 10.50.4: 319, 320 10.83.5: 593 10.84.3: 220 10.97.15: 169 10.109.1: 420 10.110.8: 566 10.120.3: 220 10.125.2: 509 10.132.3: 679 10.146.1: 200, 213 10.161.5: 464 R̥gvedakhilasūktas 142, 213 R̥gvedaprātiśākhya (RPR) 2, 36- 38, 40, 42, 58, 62, 71, 80, 83, 98-102, 104, 106, 107, 110, 111, 114, 116, 117, 123, 126, 136, 139, 151, 181, 184, 187, 191, 197, 213, 215, 217, 223, 246, 252, 258, 315, 319, 335, 395-397, 408, 416, 436, 437, 445, 461, 479, 492, 572, 574, 621, 634, 635, 637, 644, 680 R̥ktantra 38 Roth, R. 2, 7, 82, 115, 165, 167, 247, 274, 289, 308, 330, 400, 566 RPR, see: R̥gvedaprātiśākhya RV, see: R̥gveda Śabdakalpadruma 289, 609 Sadāśivabhaṭṭīya (on Laghu- śabdenduśekhara) 657 Ṣaḍviṃśabrāḥmaṇa 195 Śākalya 36-38, 61, 80, 81, 87, 90, 229, 287, 306, 334, 396, 556, 652 Śākaṭāyana 88, 89, 90, 94, 107, 108, 110, 287, 288, 306, 334,

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 806 402, 459, 460, 478, 495, 497, 530, 652 Śāṃkhamitri 243, 448-450 Śāṃkhāyana-Āraṇyaka 36, 633 Śāntanava 64 Sārasvatavyākaraṇa 13, 79, 637, 641, 642, 644-650, 662, 663, 673-675, 686, 687 Sarasvatīkaṇṭhābharaṇa 650 Sarvasammataśikṣā 157 Śarvavarman 634 Śatapathabrāhmaṇa (ŚB) 32, 38, 247, 551, 633 Śaunaka 38, 80, 81, 86-89, 93, 94, 99, 106-110, 161, 264, 266, 268, 269, 272, 498 Śaunakaśikṣā 144, 187 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (CA) 1.1.1: 15, 97, 438 1.1.2: 2, 15, 72, 91, 98, 278, 279, 283, 418, 635, 649, 687 1.1.3: 2, 62, 63, 72, 83, 100, 267 1.1.4: 15, 62, 63, 83, 101, 637 1.1.5: 15, 102, 309, 615, 647 1.1.6: 15, 103, 413 1.1.7: 15, 104, 194 1.1.8: 15, 104, 105, 263, 265, 637, 668 1.1.9: 15, 105, 637 1.1.10: 15, 75, 87, 88, 93, 94, 98, 106, 108, 171, 264, 266, 460, 498, 530, 637, 651, 668 1.1.11: 15, 107, 108, 288, 637, 651 1.1.12: 15, 40, 41, 58, 110, 116, 288, 401, 637, 676 1.1.13: 15, 113 1.1.14: 15, 113, 539 1.1.15: 15, 118, 539 1.1.16: 15, 75, 85, 120, 242, 449, 643 1.1.17: 15, 76, 123, 431, 449, 643 1.1.18: 15, 76, 125, 479, 635 1.1.19: 15, 70, 72, 74, 126, 137, 138, 140, 636 1.1.20: 15, 72, 129, 636 1.1.21: 15, 72, 74, 131, 162, 636 1.1.22: 15, 72, 75, 76, 130, 132, 636 1.1.23: 15, 134, 636 1.1.24: 15, 130, 135, 636 1.1.25: 15, 72, 74-76, 127, 136, 138, 140, 162, 636 1.1.26: 15, 125, 138, 140, 254, 636 1.1.27: 15, 70, 113, 125, 140, 146, 156, 412, 636 1.1.28: 15, 72, 75, 76, 85, 128, 132, 133, 142, 425, 636 1.1.29: 15, 76, 145, 638, 645 1.1.30: 15, 77, 146, 638 1.1.31: 15, 77, 147, 151, 638 1.1.32: 15, 77, 129, 149, 638 1.1.33: 15, 150, 638 1.1.34: 16, 151, 152, 162, 638, 644, 647 1.1.35: 16, 154, 638, 647 1.1.36: 16, 150, 155, 638 1.1.37: 16, 157, 256, 639 1.1.38: 16, 159, 160, 639 1.1.39: 16, 160, 639 1.1.40: 16, 54, 162, 639 1.1.41: 16, 163, 248, 639, 646

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ807 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 1.2.1: 16, 167, 184, 648 1.2.2: 16, 169, 170, 250, 648 1.2.3: 16, 169, 170, 173, 640 1.2.4: 16, 87, 175, 648 1.2.5: 16, 176, 180, 648 1.2.6: 16, 178, 179, 648 1.2.7: 16, 179, 648 1.2.8: 16, 180, 648 1.2.9: 16, 73, 87, 171, 182, 250, 252, 268, 648 1.2.10: 16, 70, 170, 171, 184, 252 1.2.11: 16, 182, 185, 642 1.2.12: 16, 187, 190, 642, 643 1.2.13: 16, 189, 230, 642 1.2.14: 16, 190, 642 1.2.15: 16, 69, 191, 642 1.2.16: 16, 192, 642 1.2.17: 16, 194, 642 1.2.18: 16, 195, 255, 402, 403, 642 1.2.19: 16, 196, 642 1.2.20: 16, 198, 642 1.2.21: 16, 198, 643 1.2.22: 16, 165, 199, 643 1.3.1: 17, 201, 552 1.3.2: 17, 67, 69, 202 1.3.3: 17, 203 1.3.4: 17, 203, 205, 653 1.3.5: 17, 207, 297, 298, 356, 674, 679 1.3.6: 17, 113, 208, 210, 292 1.3.7: 17, 210, 211 1.3.8: 17, 113, 211, 624, 625 1.3.9: 17, 213, 624 1.3.10: 17, 68, 214, 617, 623, 663 1.3.11: 17, 215, 225, 623, 663 1.3.12: 17, 68, 69, 216, 218, 225, 664 1.3.13: 17, 68, 218, 219, 664 1.3.14: 17, 219, 664 1.3.15: 17, 87, 220, 664 1.3.16: 17, 68, 87, 222, 664 1.3.17: 17, 214, 223, 617, 641, 664 1.3.18: 17, 225, 363, 664 1.3.19: 17, 68, 227, 664 1.3.20: 17, 229, 665 1.3.21: 17, 230, 641, 665 1.3.22: 17, 231, 363, 641 1.3.23: 17, 232 1.3.24: 17, 85, 87, 233 1.3.25: 17, 67, 85, 87, 89, 234 1.3.26: 17, 68, 69, 85, 235, 237, 238 1.3.27: 17, 236, 237 1.3.28: 17, 237, 237 1.3.29: 17, 238 1.4.1: 18, 68, 69, 73, 241, 648 1.4.2: 18, 242, 644 1.4.3: 18, 84, 244, 399, 670 1.4.4: 18, 246, 277, 296, 305, 410 1.4.5: 18, 165, 166, 247, 261 1.4.6: 18, 199, 248 1.4.7: 18, 182, 249, 256, 645 1.4.8: 18, 139, 251, 272 1.4.9: 18, 138, 254 1.4.10: 18, 157, 255, 416, 655 1.4.11: 18, 157, 257, 259, 416, 655 1.4.12: 18, 257, 258, 301, 302, 523, 667 1.4.13: 18, 256, 258, 667 1.4.14: 18, 199, 248, 259, 260, 261, 504, 667

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 808 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 2.1.1: 18, 263, 396, 442, 650, 668 2.1.2: 18, 69, 87, 263, 419, 615, 668, 669 2.1.3: 18, 69, 265, 669 2.1.4: 18, 266, 669 2.1.5: 18, 62, 72, 101, 267, 408, 668, 669 2.1.6: 18, 83, 243, 268, 280, 355, 670 2.1.7: 18, 269, 670, 671 2.1.8: 18, 270, 670 2.1.9: 18, 83, 87, 180, 181, 271, 273, 275, 284, 670, 671 2.1.10: 19, 274, 280, 671 2.1.11: 19, 274, 672 2.1.12: 19, 87, 275, 672 2.1.13: 19, 276, 280, 672 2.1.14: 19, 73, 87, 277, 672 2.1.15: 19, 278, 283, 672 2.1.16: 19, 278, 279, 672 2.1.17: 19, 272, 274, 216, 278, 280, 399, 671, 672 2.1.18: 19, 282, 563, 672 2.1.19: 19, 87, 283, 685 2.1.20: 19, 283, 284, 652 2.1.21: 19, 210, 285, 292, 308, 406, 678 2.1.22: 19, 286 2.1.23: 19, 286 2.1.24: 19, 107, 108, 110, 287, 652 2.1.25: 19, 288, 676 2.1.26: 19, 73, 289, 290, 295, 408, 677 2.1.27: 19, 209, 290, 292, 678 2.1.28: 19, 208, 294, 678, 679 2.1.29: 19, 209, 290, 294, 678 2.1.30: 19, 295, 296, 678 2.1.31: 19, 69, 296, 297, 407, 408, 673 2.1.32: 19, 297, 674 2.1.33: 19, 298, 675 2.1.34: 19, 299, 356, 363, 675, 677 2.1.35: 19, 296, 297, 299, 300, 675 2.1.36: 19, 300, 675 2.1.37: 19, 298, 301, 675 2.1.38: 19, 257, 258, 301, 675 2.1.39: 19, 303, 679 2.2.1: 19, 87, 246, 305, 679 2.2.2: 19, 210, 285, 292, 294, 308, 321, 678, 680 2.2.3: 20, 73, 241, 283, 308, 681 2.2.4: 20, 283, 309, 681 2.2.5: 20, 310, 684 2.2.6: 20, 312, 684 2.2.7: 20, 312, 313, 684 2.2.8: 20, 87, 313, 315, 685 2.2.9: 20, 315, 685 2.2.10: 20, 310, 316, 685 2.2.11: 20, 87, 317, 685 2.2.12: 20, 87, 317, 685 2.2.13: 20, 87, 318, 327, 685 2.2.14: 20, 320, 681 2.2.15: 20, 321 2.2.16: 20, 241, 321, 679 2.2.17: 20, 322, 324, 327, 406 2.2.18: 20, 324, 681, 685 2.2.19: 20, 324 2.2.20: 20, 324, 605, 682, 686 2.3.1: 20, 326, 682 2.3.2: 20, 327, 539, 682

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ809 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 2.3.3: 20, 68, 91, 328, 329, 334, 348, 574, 676, 682 2.3.4: 20, 87, 330, 334, 348, 682, 683 2.3.5: 20, 332, 348, 683 2.3.6: 20, 86, 87, 90, 332, 334, 348, 683 2.3.7: 20, 335, 339, 683 2.3.8: 20, 87, 335, 683 2.3.9: 20, 337, 683 2.3.10: 20, 337, 683 2.3.11: 20, 338, 683 2.3.12: 20, 339, 683 2.3.13: 20, 339, 683 2.3.14: 21, 87, 340, 341, 348, 684 2.3.15: 21, 87, 341, 348, 684 2.3.16: 21, 87, 342, 343, 348, 684 2.3.17: 21, 87, 343, 348, 574, 684 2.3.18: 21, 344, 348, 684 2.3.19: 21, 344, 684 2.3.20: 21, 345, 684 2.3.21: 21, 335, 338, 345, 348, 684 2.4.1: 21, 348, 349, 683 2.4.2: 21, 348, 570 2.4.3: 21, 68, 74, 348, 350 2.4.4: 21, 348, 351 2.4.5: 21, 348, 352 2.4.6: 21, 87, 348, 353, 354 2.4.7: 21, 69, 354, 356-360 2.4.8: 21, 355, 357 2.4.9: 21, 356 2.4.10: 21, 68, 279, 356-358, 366 2.4.11: 21, 68, 358, 587 2.4.12: 21, 359 2.4.13: 21, 360 2.4.14: 21, 361, 362 2.4.15: 21, 362 2.4.16: 21, 363, 365 2.4.17: 21, 68, 363, 364 2.4.18: 21, 353, 363, 364, 366, 368 2.4.19: 21, 365 2.4.20: 21, 366 2.4.21: 21, 367 2.4.22: 21, 357, 366, 368, 371, 372, 451 2.4.23: 21, 357, 369, 370, 373 2.4.24: 22, 357, 370 2.4.25: 22, 357, 371 2.4.26: 22, 357, 368, 371 2.4.27: 22, 357, 372 3.1.1: 22, 374, 685 3.1.2: 22, 375, 599, 600 3.1.3: 22, 375, 568 3.1.4: 22, 68, 364, 376, 604, 685 3.1.5: 22, 87, 377 3.1.6: 22, 378 3.1.7: 22, 379 3.1.8: 22, 380 3.1.9: 22, 381 3.1.10: 22, 382 3.1.11: 22, 382 3.1.12: 22, 383, 678 3.1.13: 22, 384, 385, 390, 589, 682 3.1.14: 22, 385, 386, 593 3.1.15: 22, 386, 390 3.1.16: 22, 386, 685 3.1.17: 22, 378 3.1.18: 22, 388, 529 3.1.19: 22, 388, 389

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 810 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 3.1.20: 22, 87, 283, 389, 685 3.1.21: 22, 384, 386, 390, 411, 592, 595 3.1.22: 22, 390, 411, 594, 595 3.1.23: 22, 349, 391 3.1.24: 22, 391 3.1.25: 22 , 392 3.2.1: 23, 244, 394, 397, 651, 672 3.2.2: 23, 180, 396, 673 3.2.3: 23, 193, 196, 398, 651, 674 3.2.4: 23, 399, 673 3.2.5: 23, 112, 399, 673 3.2.6: 23, 401 3.2.7: 23, 401, 651 3.2.8: 23, 195, 196, 402, 652 3.2.9: 23, 403 3.2.10: 23, 68, 87, 404, 663 3.2.11: 23, 405 3.2.12: 23, 406, 411, 680 3.2.13: 23, 407 3.2.14: 23, 407, 651 3.2.15: 23, 408, 419, 617, 656 3.2.16: 23, 246, 410, 585, 618, 651, 653 3.2.17: 23, 285, 410, 654 3.2.18: 23, 68, 411, 453, 656 3.2.19: 23, 68, 74, 412, 656 3.2.20: 23, 413, 656 3.2.21: 23, 411, 413, 417, 659 3.2.22: 23, 320, 321, 414, 659 3.2.23: 23, 415, 417, 659 3.2.24: 23, 87, 416, 417 3.2.25: 23, 416, 417, 659 3.2.26: 23, 69, 417 3.2.27: 23, 276, 418, 661 3.2.28: 23, 419, 661 3.2.29: 23, 419, 661 3.2.30: 23, 320, 420, 426, 427, 663 3.2.31: 23, 87, 421 3.3.1: 24, 26, 242, 422, 425 3.3.2: 24, 26, 423, 426 3.3.3: 24, 26, 424 3.3.4: 24, 26, 424 3.3.5: 24, 26, 425-427, 429 3.3.6: 24, 424, 426, 440 3.3.7: 24, 424, 427, 429, 440 3.3.8: 24, 424, 429, 430 3.3.9: 24, 424, 430, 431, 611 3.3.10: 24, 424, 431 3.3.11: 24, 424, 433 3.3.12: 24, 424, 435 3.3.13: 24, 424, 429, 435, 441 3.3.14: 24, 424, 436, 441 3.3.15: 24, 436 3.3.16: 24, 437, 614 3.3.17: 24, 425-427, 440 3.3.18: 24, 435, 441, 447 3.3.19: 24, 435, 442, 446, 450, 506, 618 3.3.20: 24, 435, 443, 446 3.3.21: 24, 435, 441, 444, 447 3.3.22: 24, 441, 445, 447 3.3.23: 24, 445 3.3.24: 24, 436, 446 3.3.25: 24, 445, 446, 506 3.3.26: 24, 26, 447, 644, 645 3.3.27: 24, 26, 447, 645 3.3.28: 24, 26, 448 3.3.29: 24, 26, 448 3.3.30: 24, 26, 243, 448 3.3.31: 24, 26, 243, 448 3.3.32: 24, 26, 243, 449 3.3.33: 24, 26, 243, 449 3.3.34: 24, 26, 243, 450

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ811 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 3.3.35: 24, 26, 443, 450, 506, 642 3.4.1: 25, 368, 451, 474, 653 3.4.2: 25, 452, 456, 462, 469 3.4.3: 25, 453 3.4.4: 25, 68, 454 3.4.5: 25, 87, 452, 456, 459, 468-470, 473 3.4.6: 25, 87, 457, 459, 464, 466 3.4.7: 25, 459 3.4.8: 25, 459, 460, 463 3.4.9: 25, 459, 461, 463 3.4.10: 25, 459, 462, 471 3.4.11: 25, 459, 462 3.4.12: 25, 459, 463 3.4.13: 25, 464 3.4.14: 25, 465 3.4.15: 25, 466 3.4.16: 25, 466 3.4.17: 25, 467, 470 3.4.18: 25, 457, 468 3.4.19: 25, 469 3.4.20: 25, 468, 470 3.4.21: 25, 462, 470, 472, 604, 615 3.4.22: 25, 471 3.4.23: 25, 472 3.4.24: 25, 87, 88, 457, 473 3.4.25: 25, 69, 451, 473, 653 3.4.26: 25, 69, 451, 474, 653 3.4.27: 25, 475 3.4.28. : 25, 476, 561 4.1.1: 26, 28, 478 4.1.2: 26, 28, 478, 479 4.1.3: 26, 28, 478, 479 4.1.4: 26, 28, 478, 480 4.1.5: 26, 28, 478, 481, 499, 500 4.1.6: 26, 28, 478, 482, 499, 500 4.1.7: 26, 28, 478, 483, 509 4.1.8: 26, 28, 478, 484 4.1.9: 26, 28, 478, 484 4.1.10: 26, 28, 478, 485, 511 4.1.11: 26, 28, 478, 486 4.1.12: 26, 28, 478, 487 4.1.13: 26, 28, 478, 487 4.1.14: 26, 28, 478, 488 4.1.15: 26, 28, 478, 489 4.1.16: 26, 28, 478, 489 4.1.17: 26, 28, 478, 490 4.1.18: 26, 28, 478, 490 4.1.19: 26, 28, 478, 488, 491, 647 4.1.20: 26, 28, 478, 488, 492, 642 4.1.21: 26, 28, 478, 488, 492 4.1.22: 26, 28, 478, 481, 493, 499 4.1.23: 26, 410, 478, 504 4.1.24: 26, 482, 483, 499, 500 4.1.25: 27, 258, 500 4.1.26: 27, 502 4.1.27: 27, 503 4.1.28: 27, 261, 504 4.1.29: 27, 499, 500, 505, 507 4.1.30: 27, 505 4.1.31: 27, 507, 539 4.1.32: 27, 507, 540 4.1.33: 27, 70, 508 4.1.34: 27, 510, 512, 529, 540, 598 4.1.35: 27, 512, 566 4.1.36: 27, 513, 522 4.1.37: 27, 513, 522

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 812 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 4.1.38: 27, 71, 267, 514, 522, 543, 555 4.1.39: 27, 516, 526, 546 4.1.40: 27, 517, 518, 546-548 4.1.41: 27, 518 4.1.42: 27, 68, 519 4.1.43: 27, 520 4.1.44: 27, 521 4.1.45: 27, 521 4.1.46: 27, 71, 522, 526 4.1.47: 27, 522 4.1.48: 27, 71, 523 4.1.49: 27, 65, 66, 71, 519-522, 525 4.1.50: 27, 66, 526 4.1.51: 27, 526 4.1.52: 27, 107, 498, 510, 529 4.1.53: 27, 530, 531 4.1.54: 27, 531 4.1.55: 27, 531, 554 4.1.56: 27, 532 4.1.57: 27, 71, 533-535 4.1.58: 27, 534 4.1.59: 27, 534, 535 4.1.60: 27, 536 4.1.61: 27, 537, 559 4.1.62: 27, 329, 538 4.1.63: 27, 539 4.1.64: 28, 537, 540, 542 4.1.65: 28, 541 4.1.66: 28, 541 4.1.67: 28, 542 4.1.68. : 28, 544 4.2.1: 28, 68, 546, 555 4.2.2: 28, 68, 547, 555 4.2.3: 28, 548, 555 4.2.4: 28, 550, 553, 555 4.2.5: 28, 66, 201, 328, 532, 538, 547, 551, 553, 555, 559 4.2.6: 28, 66, 550, 552, 555 4.2.7: 28, 553, 555 4.2.8: 28, 516, 555, 564 4.2.9: 28, 555, 556 4.2.10: 28, 557, 558 4.2.11: 28, 538, 558 4.2.12: 28, 559 4.2.13: 28, 560 4.2.14: 28, 561, 562 4.2.15: 28, 562 4.2.16: 28, 87, 282, 563 4.2.17: 28, 564 4.2.18: 28, 564, 565, 588 4.2.19: 28, 565, 566 4.2.20: 29, 513, 566 4.2.21: 29, 87, 567 4.2.22: 29, 568 4.2.23: 29, 569 4.2.24: 29, 569 4.2.25: 29, 570 4.2.26: 29, 506, 571 4.3.1: 29, 572 4.3.2: 29, 322, 573, 579, 585, 605, 626 4.3.3: 29, 578-580, 583 4.3.4: 29, 579, 598 4.3.5: 29, 580 4.3.6: 29, 582 4.3.7: 29, 584, 586 4.3.8: 29, 584 4.3.9: 29, 585, 615 4.3.10: 29, 586 4.3.11: 29, 355, 565, 587, 588 4.3.12: 29, 71, 588, 593 4.3.13: 29, 87, 590 4.3.14: 29, 590, 592

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ813 Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā (cont.) 4.3.15: 29, 593 4.3.16: 29, 593 4.3.17: 29, 594 4.3.18: 29, 595 4.3.19: 29, 595, 603 4.3.20: 29, 596 4.3.21: 29, 597, 598 4.3.22: 29, 598 4.3.23: 29, 599 4.3.24: 29, 468, 600 4.3.25: 29, 582, 601 4.3.26: 30, 602 4.3.27: 30, 364, 603 4.3.28: 30, 105, 462, 470, 604 4.3.29: 30, 325 4.4.1: 30, 607, 608 4.4.2: 30, 607 4.4.3: 30, 608 4.4.4: 30, 607, 608 4.4.5: 30, 609 4.4.6: 30, 609 4.4.7: 30, 610 4.4.8: 30, 612 4.4.9: 30, 612, 613 4.4.10: 30, 613 4.4.11: 30, 614 4.4.12: 30, 615, 624 4.4.13: 30, 616 4.4.14: 30, 214, 409, 616 4.4.15: 30, 409, 617 4.4.16: 30, 409, 619 4.4.17: 30, 619, 620 4.4.18: 30, 212, 574, 616 4.4.19: 30, 620, 622 4.4.20: 30, 622 4.4.21: 30, 199, 623, 625 4.4.22: 30, 624 4.4.23: 30, 614, 624, 625 4.4.24: 30, 574, 576, 577, 625 4.4.25: 30, 626 4.4.26: 30, 627 4.4.27: 30, 64, 628 ŚAV, see: Atharvaveda, Śaunakīya Sāyaṇa 86, 87, 91-93, 115, 165, 216, 222, 268, 323, 329, 345, 376, 379, 465, 481, 482, 494, 496, 497, 512, 524, 525, 530, 543, 558, 568 ŚB, see: Śatapathabrāhmaṇa Schröder, Otto 465 Shastri, M.D. 2, 83, 100 Shastri, Vishva Bandhu 3, 4, 82, 92, 175, 178 Shukla, J.M. 591 Siddhāntakaumudī (SK) 13, 14, 75, 77, 79, 125, 130, 180, 225, 250, 289, 379, 471, 544, 547, 635-642, 648, 649, 652-654, 657, 658, 660-665, 667, 669- 673, 675-677, 679, 680, 683, 684 Śikṣā (generic ref.) 31, 37, 39, 47, 48, 50-52, 54, 63, 70 Śikṣāprakāśa (on Pāṇinīyaśikṣā) 161 Śikṣāsaṃgraha 3, 123, 138, 147, 424, 425, 492, 574, 646 Śivasūtras 52, 53, 140, 161, 205, 572, 641 SK, see: Siddhāntakaumudī Śrīkr̥ṣṇapaṇḍita 657, 676 Stautzebach, Ralf 59, 109, 171 Strunk, Klaus 247, 249, 260, 261 Śūravīra Māṇḍūkeya 36 Surya Kanta 2-4, 14, 59, 60, 67, 79, 82-94, 107, 120, 143, 175, 183, 206, 209, 220, 234, 265,

INDEX OF TEXTS AND AUTHORS 814 267, 268, 270, 272, 273, 275- 277, 283, 287, 291, 293, 307, 315, 317-319, 327, 328, 331, 333, 334, 336, 337, 341-343, 354, 373, 375, 389-391, 393, 404, 410, 412, 416, 417, 421, 422, 432-434, 456-458, 469, 473, 502-504, 524, 527, 555, 558, 562-563, 567, 568, 580, 590 Taittirīya-Āraṇyaka 549 Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa (TB) 491, 559, 566 Taittirīyaprātiśākhya (TPR) 38, 50, 64, 99, 102-117, 123, 127, 128, 130, 134, 139, 148, 150, 151, 157, 190, 191, 214, 223, 282, 396, 397, 417, 427, 436, 445, 495 Taittirīyasaṃhitā (TS) 64, 115, 166, 169, 179, 185, 186, 188, 195, 206, 215, 230, 247, 253, 279, 307, 328, 427, 472, 495 Taittirīya-Upaniṣad 37 1.2: 37 Tāṇḍyamahābrāhmaṇa 188 Tattvabodhinī (on SK) 547, 640- 642, 648 TB, see: Taittirīyabrāhmaṇa Thieme, Paul 33, 34, 38 TPR, see: Taittirīyaprātiśākhya Tribhāṣyaratna 115, 116 Tripathi, Ramadeva 2, 161 TS, see: Taittirīyasaṃhitā Turner, R.L. 109, 110 Uddyota (on MB) 2, 46 Uṇādisūtra 223, 464, 524 Upalekhasūtra 572, 577, 621 Uvaṭa 2, 58, 62, 64, 83, 100, 101, 110, 217, 492, 562, 634, 637 Vaidikābharaṇa 64, 66, 123 Vājapyāyana 53 Vājasaneyiprātiśākhya (VPR) 38, 52, 54, 64, 77, 84, 99, 102, 104, 126, 141, 193, 214, 223, 241, 242, 246, 258, 268, 282, 303, 335, 377, 396, 417, 445, 459, 540, 552, 560, 562, 565, 574, 621, 638, 646 Vājasaneyīsaṃhitā (VS) 221, 328, 575, 576 Vākyapadīya 634 Vālmīki 90, 306, 334 Varāhopaiṣad 289 Varma, Siddheshwar 169, 171, 173, 178, 180, 189, 191, 403, 423, 455, 464 Varṇapaṭala 14, 70, 117, 119, 128, 129, 131, 135, 137, 139-141, 143, 160, 425 Varṇaratnapradīpikāśikṣā 646 Vārttika (Vt., by Kātyāyana) 46, 52, 280, 318, 327, 395, 396, 405, 413, 414, 508, 521, 540, 547, 549, 572, 640, 655-658, 660-662, 671, 674, 676, 682, 684 Vātsapra 287 Veṅkaṇ Bhaṭjī 577 Veṅkaṭamādhava 216 VPR, see: Vājasaneyiprātiśākhya VS, see: Vājasaneyīsaṃhitā Vyāḍi 53 Vyāsaśikṣā 37, 150, 307 Wackernagel, Jakob 158, 214, 247, 248, 255, 495, 655 Wadegaonkar, N.D. 657

ŚAUNAKĪYĀ CATURĀDHYĀYIKĀ815 Weber, Albrecht 3, 4, 108-110 Whitney, W.D. 1-4, 6, 7, 9-32, 82- 86, 89, 91, (passim) Witzel, Michael 179 Yājñavalkyaśikṣā 37 Yāska 455, 464, 479, 562, 632, 647 Yogopaniṣadaḥ 289