Verse 2.164-165

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 2.164:

वाचिका द्योतिका वा स्युर्द्वित्वादीनां विभक्तयः ।
स्याद्वा संख्यावतोऽर्थस्य समुदायोऽभिधायकः ॥ १६४ ॥
विना संख्याभिधानाद्वा संख्याभेदसमन्वितान् ।
अर्थान् स्वरूपभेदेन कांश्चिदाहुर्गवादयः ॥ १६५ ॥

vācikā dyotikā vā syurdvitvādīnāṃ vibhaktayaḥ |
syādvā saṃkhyāvato'rthasya samudāyo'bhidhāyakaḥ || 164 ||
vinā saṃkhyābhidhānādvā saṃkhyābhedasamanvitān |
arthān svarūpabhedena kāṃścidāhurgavādayaḥ || 165 ||

164. Case-endings are either expressive or suggestive of numbers like two. Or it might be considered that the whole (consisting of stem and suffix combined) denotes an object qualified by number etc.

165. Or it might be considered that words like ‘cow’ denote objects possessing number according to their nature, without (actually) expressing this number.

Commentary

Now begins the consideration of the meaning of parts or nouns.

[Read verse 164-165 above]

[Three views are expressed in the above two verses: (1) the case-endings express or suggest (illuminate, manifest) number, means etc., (2) the stem and the case-ending together denote number etc., either by itself being meaningless, (3) words ending in case-endings denote objects qualified by number, etc. without being actually expressive of them. Such discussions are the early forms of the discussions in later grammatical literature as to whether the stem (prātipadika) denotes one, two, three, four or five things. See M.Bhā. on P. 1.2.64.

As usual, the Vṛtti is written in rather obscure language and here and there the text is also doubtful. Its contents may be summarised somewhat as follows—Just as worldly usage is done by dividing the sentence into words and wordmeanings, in the same way, śāstraic usage is carried out by abstracting stems and suffixes from individual words. In this Matter, some think as follows—If the method of agreement and difference is adopted there is, in a word, only as much meaning as can be obtained by this method and nothing beyond that for the whole. Whatever additional meaning is understood from the whole does not come from the word itself. The Mīmāṃsakas argue as follows—Stems and suffixes have been mostly put forward on the basis of analysis by the cultured and their meanings, the basis of the śāstraic work of the Ācāryas, are analysed by the practical method of agreement and difference (anvaya and vyatireka).This analysis is for the purpose of showing that these two meanings are only a means of conveying the whole. In the world, for the cognition of the meaning of the whole, there is no division into stem-meaning and suffix meaning. Therefore, according to some, the stem conveys its own meaning (svārtha) the individual (dravya), gender, number and case. The case-endings only illuminate the cases like the object (karma). According to others, the stem expresses only its own meaning, the individual, and gender and the caseendings denote number and case. The expression of number and case by the stem is only optional, according to possibility. According to some, gender is an expressed meaning while according to others, it is only illuminated. Illumination is of two kinds: (1) conveying something which has no verbal element of its own (anāvirbhūtāvirbhāvanam), (2) eliminating one and retaining the other. For example, in pratiṣṭhate, utpucchayate and abhimanāyate. Retaining one takes place in the case of words the usage of which is well-known or not well-known. For example, upāste prapacati, adhīte, adhyeti. Or the stem and the suffix together convey a single idea as in pācaka, gopāyitā, brāhmaṇādhīna and jugupsate. In these words, the suffixes aka, āya, kha and san do not convey any separate meaning.

Alternatively, the whole, undivided into parts, endowed with many powers, closely linked with one another, expresses a meaning having a number. Without directly expressing a number at the time of the use of the word, meanings determined by different numbers which are transitory, are conveyed by words having different forms.

The Vṛtti says that the different numbers are transitory like carpets round the neck of a crow:—saṃkhyāviśeṣaiḥ kākakaṇṭhe guṇakambalavadanityaiḥ. The analogy is not clear.]