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 3.14.417
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.417:
यदि भिन्नाधिकरणो वचनादनुगम्यते ।
मृगीव चपलेत्यत्र पुंवद्भावो न सिध्यति ॥ ४१७ ॥yadi bhinnādhikaraṇo vacanādanugamyate |
mṛgīva capaletyatra puṃvadbhāvo na sidhyati || 417 ||417. If a compound is formed of words referring to two different objects, on the basis of special injunction there would be no masculine form of the first term when a compound is formed of mṛgīva capalā.
Commentary
Now M. Bhā. I. p. 397, 1. 22-23, is going to be explained.
[Read verse 417 above]
[The sūtra P. 2.1.55 is found in a context where compounds of words with others in opposition to them (samānādhikaraṇa) are taught. If śyāmā refers to Devadattā (the upameya) and śastrī to the upamāna, it means that they do not refer to the same object, that they are not samānādhikaraṇa. How then can they be compounded at all? If it is held that they can be compounded because of the special injunction (vacana) namely P. 2.1.55, even then another difficulty would arise, namely, that when we make a compound of mṛgīva capalā we cannot get the form mṛgacapalā with the first term in the masculine form by P. 6.3.42, because that is also conditioned sāmānādhikaraṇya.]
A possible way of getting out of this difficulty is now referred to.