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 3.14.230
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.230:
अभिधानेऽपि सङ्खयायाः संख्यात्वं न निवर्तते ।
षष्ठ्यर्थस्याभिधाने तु स्यात् प्रातिपदिकार्थता ॥ २३० ॥abhidhāne'pi saṅkhayāyāḥ saṃkhyātvaṃ na nivartate |
ṣaṣṭhyarthasyābhidhāne tu syāt prātipadikārthatā || 230 ||230. Even if number is already expressed (by the compound itself) it does not give up its nature. If the meaning of the sixth case-ending is already expressed, then it has become part of the (bahuvrīhi) stem-meaning.
Commentary
The difficulty thus pointed out in the view that the bahuvrīhi denotes the whole meaning of the other word is answered as follows—
[Read verse 230 above]
[As far as the suffix expressive of gender (like ṭāp) is concerned, it can be added to a bahuvrīhi as it can be added to other stems, even if its meaning is included in that of the bahuvrīhi, because it has already been stated that the feminine suffix is only indicative (dyotaka) of the notion of the feminine already included in the meaning of the stem. It does not bring anything new. As to case-endings expressive of number, the present stanza answers the objection. Even if number is already expressed by the bahuvrīhi-stem itself, case-endings expressive of number would be added to it. It is like the words ekaḥ, dvau, bahavaḥ. In all these words, the stem itself expresses number and yet a case-ending has been added to them. When the compound expresses the Kāraka relations also, its number would qualify them and so a case-ending like the second one would have to be added to express that number which qualifies the Kāraka relation as in citragum ānaya. Even the first case-ending may have to be added sometimes in order that the bare-stem (kevala prakrtiḥ) may not be used. Here the bahuvrīhi is not like an indeclinable, because the elision of the feminine suffix and the case-endings after the latter is specially prescribed by P. 2.4.82. The sixth case-ending, however, cannot be added because it has become merged in the meaning of the bahuvrīhi stem itself.]
It is now stated that others have stated another view on this matter.