Vakyapadiya of Bhartrihari
by K. A. Subramania Iyer | 1965 | 391,768 words
The English translation of the Vakyapadiya by Bhartrihari including commentary extracts and notes. The Vakyapadiya is an ancient Sanskrit text dealing with the philosophy of language. Bhartrhari authored this book in three parts and propounds his theory of Sphotavada (sphota-vada) which understands language as consisting of bursts of sounds conveyi...
This book contains Sanskrit text which you should never take for granted as transcription mistakes are always possible. Always confer with the final source and/or manuscript.
Verse 3.14.68
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.68:
मुण्डिसूत्र्यादयोऽसद्भिर्भागैरनुगता इव ।
विभक्ताः कल्पितात्मनो धातवः कुट्टिचर्चिवत् ॥ ६८ ॥muṇḍisūtryādayo'sadbhirbhāgairanugatā iva |
vibhaktāḥ kalpitātmano dhātavaḥ kuṭṭicarcivat || 68 ||68. Muṇḍi, sūtri etc. appear to have parts which are really non-existent. They arc divided into parts which are fictitious. They are roots like √kuṭṭi, √carci.
Commentary
How to explain the fact that expressions like muṇḍayati, sūtrayati can be connected with an outside word expressive of an object?
[Read verse 68 above]
[Muṇḍayati, sūtrayati etc. are not in the same position as kṛtapūrvī. They express special actions and can, therefore, be connected with their respective objects like māṇavaka or vyākaraṇa directly in sentences like: māṇavakaṃ muṇḍayati = ‘he shaves the student’s head’, vyākaraṇam sūtrayati = ‘he writes grammar in sūtra form’. To explain muṇḍayati as muṇḍam karoti, that is, to divide it into parts is only a technical means of explaining it. In reality, it has no parts. Therefore, the objection that muṇḍa does not express action at all and. therefore, how can it be connected with an external word expressive of an object like māṇavaka does not hold good. It is muṇḍayati which is directly connected with māṇavaka and not muṇḍa which is fictitious.]