Verse 3.14.597

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.14.597:

प्रचये भिद्यमाने तु संख्या पूलेषु भिद्यते ।
अर्थभेदो लुबन्तेषु नैव कश्चन दृश्यते ॥ ५९७ ॥

pracaye bhidyamāne tu saṃkhyā pūleṣu bhidyate |
arthabhedo lubanteṣu naiva kaścana dṛśyate || 597 ||

597. When the collections are many, the total number of bundles is also many. Nor does one see any difference in meaning whether the words ending in lup (involve one upamāna or more).

Commentary

[This analogy is questioned by some. From the word pañcapūlī, the meaning of the dvigu compound is understood, namely the idea of collection of five bundles. It is not the same idea which is understood, from the word pañcapūlyaḥ. From this word, the idea of collection of five quintuplets is not understood. From the former word, one understands an object qualified by the number five. From the latter, one understands at least three objects, each consisting of five items. The chief difference is that, from the latter, one does not understand a collection at all, because it is an ekaśeṣa and not a dvigu compound. While this can be said about the word pañcapūlyaḥ, brought in for the sake of analogy the same thing cannot be said about the word Kāśyapāḥ which is the subject of discussion. Whether each object of comparison, the image, is compared to a separate standard of comparison and then an ekaśeṣa is made of all the words so formed or whether all the objects of comparison are compared to one single standard of comparison, the same meaning is understood in both cases. As there is no difference in meaning, the meaning of lup is present even when an ekaśeṣa is made of all the words made at first separately. Therefore P. 1.2.51 would apply and the resulting word would have the singular number of the stem, that is, the yukta. It might be said that there is a difference in meaning as follows—If each image is compared to a separate standard of comparison and the plural number comes through ekaśeṣa, then each image is compared to Kāśyapa. But if many images are compared to a single standard of comparison then one Kāśyapa would be the standard for all. It is true that there is this much difference. But it is the image which is the meaning of lup that attains plurality and not any other meaning, and so P. 1.2.51 should apply. If it is applied, there would be singular number. Therefore the form Kāśyapāḥ has to be justified in some other way.]