विशेषणं तुल्याधिकरणेन । … अयं श्यामरामसंज्ञः । तदेकधर्मत्वे तु न समासः ।
viśeṣaṇaṁ tulyādhikaraṇena | … ayaṁ śyāmarāma-saṁjñaḥ | tad-eka-dharmatve tu na samāsaḥ |
(Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1686, 1688–1689)“[When] A modifier (viśeṣaṇa) [is compounded] with that which has a common locus (adhikaraṇa) … this is known as a śyāmarāma [compound, i.e., a karma-dhāraya compound]. But when it has the same essential quality (dharma) as that [i.e., as the viśeṣya with which it has a common locus (adhikaraṇa)], there is no [formation of a] compound.”
Commentary
tulyādhikaraṇena viśeṣyeṇa saha viśeṣaṇaṁ tulyādhikaraṇaṁ samasyate |
(Amṛta-ṭīkā on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1686)“A modifier (viśeṣaṇa) of common locus (tulyādhikaraṇa-viśeṣaṇa) is compounded with a qualificand (viśeṣya) of common locus (tulyādhikaraṇa-viśeṣya) [in the case of a śyāmarāma compound].”
śyamaś cāsau rāmaś ceti, rāmaś cāsau śyāmaś ceti vā vigrahe … | ca-śabdārthaḥ samāsenaivocyata iti tad-aprayogaḥ, “uktārthānām aprayogaḥ” iti nyāyena | … atra varṇāntara-rāmau vyāvartya viśeṣa-kathanāt śyāma-padasya viśeṣaṇatvam | yatraiva śyāmatvaṁ tatraiva rāma-saṁjñatvam iti tulyādhikaraṇatvam, na tu kṛṣṇasya puruṣa ity-ādau, kṛṣṇādi-śabdānām eva viśeṣaṇatve ’pi vyadhikaraṇatvam; yad uktam—‘bhinna-pravṛtti-nimittayor ekasminn arthe vṛttiḥ samānādhikaraṇyam’ iti |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1688)“The vigraha [of the compound] is, ‘He is also green (śyāma) and is also Rāma,’ or, ‘He is also Rāma and is also green (śyāma).’ … The meaning of the word ca is expressed by the compound itself and thus there is non-usage of it [in the compound] in accord with the maxim (nyāya), ‘There is non-usage [in a compound] of those [words] whose sense is expressed [by the compound itself] (uktārthānām aprayogaḥ).’ … Here [i.e., in the compound Śyāmarāma, meaning, ‘green Rāma,’ i.e., Rāma, the king of Ayodhyā and son of Daśaratha whose complexion is greenish], the word śyāma’s being a modifier (viśeṣaṇa) is because of [its] stating a differentia (viśeṣa) by excluding the two Rāmas of other complexions [i.e., Balarāma, who is of fair complexion, and Paraśurāma, who is of reddish complexion]. Where specifically there is greenness (śyāmatva), there specifically there is the quality of being known as ‘Rāma’ (rāma-saṁjñatva). Thus, there is common locusness [alt., co-ordinate predication] (tulyādhikaraṇatvam) [i.e., thus both greenness (śyāmatva) and the quality of being known as ‘Rāma’ (rāma-saṁjñatva) have a common locus], and not, rather, [in this case is there] a distinct locus (vyadhikaraṇa) as in ‘a person of Kṛṣṇa’ and so forth [i.e., as in compounds such as ‘Kṛṣṇa-puruṣa’ (syn., tat-puruṣa)] even though words such as ‘Kṛṣṇa’ [in such compounds] have the status of modifiers (viśeṣaṇatva) [in those compounds], since it is said, ‘Use of those [words] that have two different causes (nimittas) of usage (pravṛtti) for one object is [called] common locusness [alt., co-ordinate predication] (sāmānyādhikaraṇyam).’”
prācīna-vacanena tulyādhikaraṇa-lakṣaṇam ācaṣṭe—bhinneti | pravṛtteḥ śabda-prayogasya nimittaṁ abhidheyaḥ, bhinnaṁ pravṛtti-nimittaṁ yayoḥ (viśeṣya-viśeṣaṇa-śabdayor iti yāvat) tayor ekasminn arthe ekasmin vastuni vṛttir avasthānaṁ sāmānyādhikaraṇyam ity arthaḥ | yatheha śyāma-śabdasya pravṛtter nimittaṁ śyāmatva-guṇaḥ, rāma-śabdasya tu pravṛtter nimittāni bahūni santi, balarāmādi-vyakti-viśeṣā ity arthaḥ | yadā vibhinna-pravṛtti-nimittayor etayoḥ śyāma-rāma-śabdayor daśaratha-nandana-rūpe ekasmin padārthe sthitir bodhyate tadaiva tau parasparaṁ samānādhikaraṇau bhavata iti viśadārthaḥ |
(Excerpt from the Amṛta-ṭīkā on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1688)“The characteristic of common locus (tulyādhikaraṇa) is designated by a statement of the ancients: bhinna … [‘Use of those [words] that have two different causes (nimittas) of usage (pravṛtti) for one object is [called] common locusness [alt., co-ordinate predication] (sāmānyādhikaraṇyam)’]. ‘Of usage’ (pravṛtti) means of usage of words, and ‘cause’ (nimitta) means something that is to be named [i.e., an abhidheya]. [Thus, the meaning is:] The use (vṛtti), that is, dwelling, of two different causes of usage (to be specific, of two words, a qualificand (viśeṣya) and a modifier (viśeṣaṇa)) in regard to one object (ekasmin arthe), that is, in one existent, is [called] common locusness (sāmānyādhikaraṇyam, i.e., tulyādhikaraṇya). This is the meaning. For example, here the cause (nimitta) of the usage (pravṛtti) of the word śyāma [‘green’] is the quality of greenness (śyāmatva), whereas the causes of the usage of the word Rāma are many: the particular persons beginning with Balarāma [i.e., there are many causes for the usage of the word Rāma because there are many persons known by this name, such as Balarāma]. This is the meaning. When the fixity upon one referent (padārtha) in the form of the Son of Daśaratha of these two words śyāma and rāma, which are of distinct causes of usage, is to be conveyed, then these two are of mutually common locus (samānādhikaraṇa). This is the clear meaning.”
dharmāntara-rahitasya viśeṣaṇasya vyāvartakatva-dharmābhāvān na samāsa iti tātparyam | viśeṣaṇaṁ tāvad dvi-vidhaṁ, vyāvartakam uparañjakaṁ ceti | tatrādyasyaivāyaṁ samāsaḥ, uparañjakasya tu viśeṣya-dharmānuvāda-mātratvāt svarūpākhyānam eva, tata eva na samāsa iti marma |
(Amṛta-ṭīkā on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1689)“Because of a modifier (viśeṣaṇa) devoid of a distinct essential quality (dharma) lacking the essential quality (dharma) of being a distinguisher (vyāvartaka), there is no compound [formed]. This is the intent. A modifier (viśeṣaṇa), fundamentally, is of two types: (1) a distinguisher (vyāvartaka) or (2) an influencer (uparañjaka). In this regard, this compound [i.e., the śyāmarāma type compound] is only of the former [i.e., of a distinguishing modifier (vyāvartaka-viśeṣaṇa)]. On the contrary, because of an influencer (uparañjaka) being only a re-statement of the essential quality (dharma) of the qualificand (viśeṣya), it is only an expression of the nature [of the qualificand (viśeṣya], and thus there is no compound [made with it]. This is the essence.”
pāṇḍaraḥ śaṅkhaḥ … vṛkṣaḥ śiṁśapā |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1689)“[Thus, it is said:] ‘A white conch,’ [i.e., because a conch is known to be white by nature, the word white is not a distinguishing modifier (vyāvartaka-viśeṣaṇa) of it since it merely restates the essential quality (dharma) of a conch which is already known from the word conch itself, and thus it is not to be compounded with conch] … and ‘the tree śiṁśapā’ [i.e., because śiṁśapā (Indian Rosewood, Dalbergia sissoo] is known to be a tree by nature the word tree is not a distinguishing modifier (vyāvartaka-viśeṣaṇa) of it since it merely restates an essential quality (dharma) of a śiṁśapā which is already known from the word śiṁśapā itself, and thus it is not to be compounded with śiṁśapā].”
anya-sāpekṣatve śyāmo rāmo mahān ity atra na samāsaḥ | evaṁ ‘vigraha-samāsayor vikalpaḥ’ |
(Vṛtti on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1690)“Here in [the example], śyāmo Rāmo mahān [‘green Rāma is great’], there is no compound because of dependence on another [word]. Thus, [it is said,] ‘There is an option of isolation (vigraha) or compounding (samāsa).’”
This statement implies that all samāsas are optional unless they are specifically enjoined as compulsory or specifically prohibited. Thus, one can say either śyāmo Rāmaḥ [“green Rāma”] or Śyāma-rāmaḥ [“green Rāma”].
paraspara-sambandhārthānām ity atra paraspara-grahaṇenānya-sāpekṣatā yan nirāsitā tat spaṣṭayati, śyāmo rāmo mahān iti | atra rāma-śabdārthasya śyāma-śabdārthena saha sambandho vidyata eva, kintu rāma-śabdo mahān iti padam apekṣate, tenātra na samāsaḥ |
(Amṛta-ṭīkā on Hari-nāmāmṛta-vyākaraṇa: 1690)“He clarifies the dependence on another [word] which is excluded [from usage] by the inclusion of ‘with one another’ (paraspara) in [the statement in HBV 1683], ‘the meaning of which have a relationship with one another’ (paraspara-sambandhārthānāṁ): Śyāmo Rāmo mahān [i.e., he states this example, ‘green Rāma is great’]. Here, the meaning of the word Rāma has a relationship with the meaning of the word green (śyāma), but the word Rāma is dependent on the word great (mahān). Thus, here there is no compound.”
Categories