Home » Example for the day » दारुण: n-Ab-s

दारुण: n-Ab-s

Today we will look at the form दारुणः from श्रीमद्भागवतम् SB 11-10-8

विलक्षणः स्थूलसूक्ष्माद्देहादात्मेक्षिता स्वदृक् |
यथाग्निर्दारुणो दाह्याद्दाहकोऽन्यः प्रकाशकः ।। ११-१०-८ ।।

Gita Press translation “As a burning fire, that shows things, is different from the piece of wood that is burnt and illumined, so is the self-manifest soul, the witness of all, distinct from the subtle and gross bodies.”

‘दारु’ gets प्रातिपदिकसंज्ञा by 1-2-45 अर्थवदधातुरप्रत्ययः प्रातिपदिकम्. The विवक्षा here is पञ्चमी-एकवचनम्. 4-1-2 स्वौजसमौट्छष्टाभ्याम्भिस्ङेभ्याम्भ्यस्ङसिँभ्याम्भ्यस्ङसोसाम्ङ्योस्सुप् mandates the प्रत्ययाः सुँ, औ, जस् etc. after the प्रातिपदिकम् ‘दारु’.

(1) दारु + ङसिँ ।

(2) दारु + अस् । अनुबन्ध-लोपः by 1-3-2 उपदेशेऽजनुनासिक इत्, 1-3-8 लशक्वतद्धिते and 1-3-9 तस्य लोपः.

(3) दारु नुँम् + अस् । By 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ , when a case affix that begins with a vowel follows, the इक् (इ, उ, ऋ, ऌ) ending neuter bases get the नुँम् augment.

(4) दारु न् + अस् । अनुबन्ध-लोपः by 1-3-2 उपदेशेऽजनुनासिक इत्, 1-3-3 हलन्त्यम् and 1-3-9 तस्य लोपः.

(5) दारुन: । Applying रुँत्व-विसर्गौ 8-2-66 ससजुषो रुः and 8-3-15 खरवसानयोर्विसर्जनीयः.

(6) दारुण: । The letter न् is replaced by ण् by 8-4-2 अट्कुप्वाङ्नुम्व्यवायेऽपि.

Questions:

1. Which word in the verse gives us the hint that दारुणः is पञ्चमी-एकवचनम् and not षष्ठी-एकवचनम् ?

2. Why didn’t the सूत्रम् 7-1-25 अद्ड् डतरादिभ्यः पञ्चभ्यः apply in the word अन्य: ?

3. Can you spot a ऋकारान्त-प्रातिपदिकम् in this verse?

4. In the ङसिँ-प्रत्यय: , the ending इकार: and the beginning ङकार: get the इत्-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-3-2 उपदेशेऽजनुनासिक इत् and 1-3-8 लशक्वतद्धिते respectively. They are both dropped by 1-3-9 तस्य लोपः , after which only अस् remains. At this point do we use 1-3-4 न विभक्तौ तुस्माः to prevent the ending सकार: from getting the इत्-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-3-3 हलन्त्यम् ?

5. Which other प्रातिपदिकम् (besides “दारु”) used in the verse has the घि-सञ्ज्ञा ?

6. In the absence of 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ which rule would have applied to give which (undesired) form?

7. Which word in the verse translates to “that shows things”?

8. In the व्यख्यानम् on the सूत्रम् 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ the काशिका says “इकः इति किम्? कुण्डे। पीठे।” What does this mean?

Easy questions:

1. Which सूत्रम् was used to get आत्मा + ईक्षिता = आत्मेक्षिता ?

2. Can you think of another सूत्रम् (besides 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ) which mentions the इक्-प्रत्याहार: ?


1 Comment

  1. 1. Which word in the verse gives us the hint that दारुणः is पञ्चमी-एकवचनम् and not षष्ठी-एकवचनम् ?
    Doing the सन्धि-विच्छेद: and meaning of the second line: यथा (just as) अग्निः (fire) दारुणः (from firewood) दाह्यात् (from that which is to be burned) दाहकः (which burns) अन्यः (other) प्राकाशकः (that which illuminates).
    The word दाह्यात् (which is an adjective to दारुणः and hence has समानाधिकरणम् with it) gives the indication that दारुणः is पञ्चमी-एकवचनम् and not षष्ठी-एकवचनम् . Since दाह्यात् is unambiguously पञ्चमी-एकवचनम् we can conclude that दारुणः should also be पञ्चमी-एकवचनम् .

    2. Why didn’t the सूत्रम् 7-1-25 अद्ड् डतरादिभ्यः पञ्चभ्यः apply in the word अन्य: ?

    The वृत्तिः of 7-1-25 states “एभ्यः क्लीबेभ्यः स्वमोरद्ड् आदेशः स्यात्”.
    Only when ‘अन्य’ (‘अन्य’ is one of the five pronouns डतर etc. listed in 1-1-27) is used in the neuter this rule applies when ‘सुँ’ or ‘अम्’ follows.
    Here अन्य: is a masculine form – it goes with अग्निः which is the masculine noun. So 7-1-25 doesn’t apply.

    3. Can you spot a ऋकारान्त-प्रातिपदिकम् in this verse?
    ईक्षिता प्रथमा-एकवचनम् ; ऋकारान्त-प्रातिपदिकम् is ईक्षितृ

    4. In the ङसिँ-प्रत्यय: , the ending इकार: and the beginning ङकार: get the इत्-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-3-2 उपदेशेऽजनुनासिक इत् and 1-3-8 लशक्वतद्धिते respectively. They are both dropped by 1-3-9 तस्य लोपः , after which only अस् remains. At this point do we use 1-3-4 न विभक्तौ तुस्माः to prevent the ending सकार: from getting the इत्-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-3-3 हलन्त्यम् ?

    No. In the case of ङसिँ-प्रत्ययः , the सकारः is not अन्त्य-हल्. (The इकार: is अन्त्य: – ending letter.) Therefore it never gets the इत्-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-3-3 हलन्त्यम् . So we do not need 1-3-4 न विभक्तौ तुस्माः to prevent इत्-सञ्ज्ञा .

    5. Which other प्रातिपदिकम् (besides “दारु”) used in the verse has the घि-सञ्ज्ञा ?
    ‘अग्नि’ . (घि-सञ्ज्ञा is defined by 1-4-7 शेषो घ्यसखि – When a short इ ending or short उ ending term – except for सखि – does not have the नदी-संज्ञा then it gets the घिसंज्ञा.)

    6. In the absence of 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ which rule would have applied to give which (undesired) form?

    ‘दारु’ gets घि-सञ्ज्ञा by 1-4-7 शेषो घ्यसखि .
    In the absence of 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ , then 7-3-111 घेर्ङिति and 6-1-110 ङसिङसोश्च would apply giving the undesired form दारोः .

    7. Which word in the verse translates to “that shows things”?
    प्रकाशकः

    8. In the व्यख्यानम् on the सूत्रम् 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ the काशिका says “इकः इति किम्? कुण्डे। पीठे।” What does this mean?

    “इकः इति किम्? कुण्डे। पीठे।” – By observing the forms कुण्डे (प्रातिपदिकम्-‘कुण्ड’) and पीठे (प्रातिपदिकम्-‘पीठ’) we can know why इकः has been explicitly stated in 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ. (कुण्डे/पीठे can be either प्रथमा-द्विवचनम् or द्वितीया-द्विवचनम् .) Both “‘कुण्ड” and “पीठ” end in an अकार: which is not an इक् letter.
    If इकः were not specified then 7-1-73 would add नुँम्-आगमः to even अकारान्त-नपुंसकलिङ्ग-प्रातिपदिकानि (we would get undesired forms like कुण्डनी, पीठनी.) To prevent this पाणिनि: has put इकः in 7-1-73.

    Easy questions:
    1. Which सूत्रम् was used to get आत्मा + ईक्षिता = आत्मेक्षिता ?
    6-1-87 आद्गुणः

    2. Can you think of another सूत्रम् (besides 7-1-73 इकोऽचि विभक्तौ) which mentions the इक्-प्रत्याहार: ?
    6-1-77 इको यणचि
    Also in 1-1-3 इको गुणवृद्धी

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

November 2010
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

Topics