बाहुल्यात्क्वचिन्नित्य-समासः । क्वचिन्न समासः । क्वचिद्विशेषणेन च विशेषणं समस्यते । किञ्चित्त्वेन विभागे गम्येऽपि ।
bāhulyāt kvacin nitya-samāsaḥ | kvacin na samāsaḥ | kvacid viśeṣaṇena ca viśeṣaṇaṁ samasyate | kiñcittvena vibhāge gamye’pi |
(Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1691–1694)
“Because of [compounds’] being bahula [i.e., of a variable applicability], sometimes there is a compulsory compound (nitya-samāsa), sometimes no compound, and sometimes a modifier (viśeṣaṇa) compounded with a modifier (viśeṣaṇa), and this [i.e., that a viśeṣaṇa is sometimes compounded with a viśeṣaṇa] is so even when a division is understood because of being somewhat [i.e., being partial in extent].”
Commentary
kṛṣṇa-sarpaḥ sarpa-jāti-viśeṣaḥ | lohita-śālir dhānya-jāti-bhedaḥ | stoka-kṛṣṇas tan-nāmā śrī-kṛṣṇasya sakhā |samāsenaiva tat-tat-pratipatter nityatvam |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1691)
“[Examples of compulsory compounds (nitya-samāsas) are as follows:] kṛṣṇa-sarpa [‘black snake’], a particular type of snake; lohita-śāli [‘red rice’], a particular type of rice; Stoka-kṛṣṇa [‘Little Kṛṣṇa’], a friend of Kṛṣṇa with this name. The compulsoriness [of these compounds] is because of understanding of these [compounds] only by the compound [i.e., these compounds are compulsory because their meaning can be understood only through the compound, and their meaning is not conveyed if the words in the compound are isolated].”
This intention here is that a compound like Stoka-kṛṣṇaḥ cannot be isolated the way the compound Śyāma-rāmaḥ can. Śyāma-rāmaḥ [“Green Rāma”] can be isolated and explained to mean, “He is green, and he is Rāma,” but, Stoka-kṛṣṇaḥ does not mean, “He is little (stoka), and he is Kṛṣṇa” [i.e., it does mean Kṛṣṇa when he is little]; it means a person other than Kṛṣṇa who is a friend of Kṛṣṇa and named “Little Kṛṣṇa.”
rāmo jāmadagnyaḥ, vyāsaḥ pārāśaryaḥ, arjunaḥ kārtavīryaḥ | tad evaṁ viśeṣyeṇa viśeṣaṇasya samāsa uktaḥ |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1692)
“[Examples of would-be compounds that are forbidden are as follows:] Rāmo Jāmadagnyaḥ [‘Rāma, son of Jāmadagni’], Vyāsaḥ Pārāśaryaḥ [‘Vyāsa, son of Parāśara’], and Arjunaḥ Kārtavīryaḥ [‘Arjuna, son of Kṛtavīrya’]. Thus, in this way, the compound of a viśeṣaṇa with a viśeṣya has been described.”
kṛṣṇa-lohito dhūmra-varṇaḥ, śyāma-sundaraḥ |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1693)
“[Examples of a viśeṣaṇa compounded with another viśeṣaṇa are as follows:] kṛṣṇa-lohitaḥ [‘blackish-red’], that is the color dark-red [alt., purple], śyāma-sundaraḥ [‘dark and beautiful’, i.e., Kṛṣṇa’].”
kiñcid aṅgaṁ naraḥ kiñcit siṁhaḥ—nara-siṁhaḥ | śukla-kṛṣṇaḥ, kṛtākṛtaṁ, yātānuyātam |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1694)
“[An example of a viśeṣaṇa compounded with another viśeṣaṇa even when a division is understood because of being partial in extent as follows:] nara-siṁha [‘man-lion’], that is, one who is some part human, and some [part] lion. [Similarly,] śukla-kṛṣṇaḥ [‘white-black,’ i.e., partially white, partially black‘], kṛtākṛtam [‘done-undone,’ i.e. partially done, partially undone], yātānuyātam [’gone-following,’ i.e., partially gone, partially following’].”