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 3.14.545
Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.545:
उपमेयेन सम्बन्धात् प्राक् तु प्रासादादिहेतुके ।
व्यतिरेके वतेर्भावो न तु तुल्याप्थहेतुके ॥ ५४५ ॥upameyena sambandhāt prāk tu prāsādādihetuke |
vyatireke vaterbhāvo na tu tulyāpthahetuke || 545 ||545. Before connection with the object of comparison, difference due to external words like prāsāda is understood and the case-affix (the seventh or the sixth) comes due to that and not due to the meaning of similarity.
Commentary
[Once the need for the word kriyā in P. 5. 1.115 is established the need for the next rule is also established. The scope of the two rules can be delimited as follows:—In the examples of P. 5.1.116, before connection with the object of comparison (upameya) takes place, difference due to prāsāda (mansion) and danta (teeth) is understood and the case-affixes based on that, namely, the seventh and the sixth come into being and then only does the connection with the meaning of iva take place and with the object of comparison to express which the suffix vati is added. Thus the case-endings here are due to connection with the external word prāsāda and danta. They are said to be external because they are different from the words actually involved in the formation of the word. This is not what happens in the previous sūtra. There the difference, is understood from the meaning of the word tulya which is not something external but is included in the word to be formed and the third case-ending is based on that and the suffix vati is added to the word ending in that. For the understanding of difference there is no need to resort to an external word. If the word kriyā is not mentioned in the previous sūtra, the suffix vati would come even if the resemblance is due to something else than action as in the sentence brāhmaṇena tulyaḥ kṣattriyaḥ. Thus P. 5.1.116 is necessary in order to cover cases where the resemblance is not due to action.]