 Welcome. I welcome you all to this lecture in the course, Samasa in Paninian Grammar. And this is the first course. We begin our lecture with the recitation of the Mangala Charana. In this lecture, we will make some general remarks on the process of compounding. And also the historical development of Sanskrit language. In the previous lecture, we have seen the rules in Paninian Grammar dealing with the Swara Karya, which happens at the end of the derivation of the compound. However, the constituents, they already have the accent, which is an inbuilt accent. We were looking at the Swara Karyas as part of the process of the derivation of the compound, which starts with the semantic condition. And we also noted the sutras in the Paninian Grammar system, which trigger all these operations. So, Samarthapada Vidhi, we said, is the one which lays down the very basic foundational principle for the process of compounding to take place. And this process happens in the Arthakasha of the speaker. And then there is the necessary condition in the form of Sahasupa, which lays down once again a very generic principle of a Subanta, getting compounded with another interrelated, semantically interrelated Subanta. So, the grammatical theory of Sanskrit excludes any compound between a Subanta and Tinganta, and also a Tinganta and another Tinganta. It has to be between two Subanthas. Then we said that there is something called Alawkika Vigraha, where the process of compounding begins. Then we add the Samasanta Pratyaya. Then before that we do the Purvapada Nirdharana. And then the Subaluk takes place, after which the morphological operations on the Purvapada, they take place. Then there are some other phonological operations. Then finally the Sandhi, that takes place. And then you have the Swarakaryas, that also take place. After having studied the theoretical background of the compounding, the Samasas, and then also the sequence in which the process of compounding takes place, in this lecture we will make some general remarks on this entire process. And we shall also talk about the historical development of Sanskrit language with specific focus on the process of compounding. First let us talk about the Panini's treatment of Samasa. In Panini's grammar, different rules play different roles in the process of derivation, as we have already seen. There are some rules which prescribe a particular operation. And these rules are called Vidhi Sutras, from stating the initial process up to the intermediate processes. They are all stated by what is known as the Vidhi Sutra. After which there are some meta-rules that come into play. These are called the Parivashasutras in the system of Panini and grammar. Then there are some other rules which designate the technical terms. And these are called Saudnya Sutras. And there are some rules which state the operation of substitution, namely the Atidesha Sutras. It is primarily because of these Atidesha Sutras that the derivation process retains its continuity, whereas the derived output shares similarity with the input stage. And that is primarily because of the concept of Atidesha Sutra stated in the Panini and grammar. So these are the different rules which play different roles in the entire process of derivation of the compounding. However, we note that there are only about 100 basic Vidhi Sutras for Samasa. They are stated in 2.1 and also in 2.2 in the Ashtadhyayi. There are 92 Vidhi Sutras prescribing the Samasa and the suffixes stated in 5.4. And there are about 200 Vidhi Sutras prescribing the accent of Samasa stated in 6.2. These sutras overall may be exhaustively describing the language of Panini's time. But as time grew, language grew and these numbers started falling short of capturing the usage. This is what is seen as far as the treatment of compounds in the later Panini and grammatical tradition. The tradition of Panini's grammar gave authoritativeness to the system and any speech form which is in accordance with this system was considered sadhu or worth using and others which are not in accordance with this particular system are considered not worth using. So, in the course of time we observe that the pressure on the system increased due to two factors. One, the limited number of available rules and also the increasing and varied usage. Then the tradition figured out some solutions to this particular problem. And these solutions are primarily internal to the overall derivational system of Panini and grammar in the form of reinterpretations. Reinterpretations of what? Reinterpretations of words in the sutras. Reinterpretations of types of sutras and also breaking up of the words in the sutras. These are the means resorted to by the later Panini and grammatical tradition to figure out solution to this particular problem. So, then we have the concept of generic prescription. For example, we saw that sahasupa which is initially stated as an adhikara sutra that governs the entire samasa section and lays down the basic condition for the compounding to take place namely that only two subantas can be compounded. Was interpreted in a generic manner and any subanta which is interrelated to any other subanta can be compounded together and such a compound was also given a technical term as supsup samasa or kebala samasa. This is one of the solutions figured out by the later Panini and grammatical tradition in order to account for and remove the problem where the limited number of sutras are to account for an increasing and varied usage. The other solution is the concept of open-ended word bag also known as akratigana and there are several such word bags proposed by Panini and we shall study some of them over here and also when we study some other sutras. Similarly, there are breakup of sutras also known as yoga vibhaga and yoga in this context means a sutra, yoga means sutra. So, yoga vibhaga means sutra vibhaga. So, you divide a sutra into two A and B and A may mean some generic meaning once again and B when joined with A would give you the normal generally understood meaning of the sutra. So, breakup of sutras is one such solution. Also, there are new statements made by the later Panini and grammatical tradition to account for the new usages. There are new arguments which are put forward. There are new concepts which are discovered and which are stated in order to account for such usages. Let us study these one by one. First, let us take the concept of generic prescription. Sahasupa 214 is originally an adhikara sutra governing 2.1 and 2.2 where compound prescribing rules are stated. So, all the rules will be constrained by the conditions stated in this particular sutra. That means if we have this structure which means that there are 2 padas where the pratyaya in both the padas is asup over here and over here. We do not mind what is the prakriti. The only thing we need is that they should be interrelated. But these 2 should be soaps. This is the essential condition and then we would say yes to the compound. But if we have soop plus thing then we would say no to this combination or if we have thing plus thing we would say no to this combination following the sutra sahasupa 214. This is the generic prescription of the compound. This is the adhikara sutra. Now in order to accommodate the newly generated varied usage the tradition reinterpreted 214 as a vidhi sutra. So, an adhikara sutra is reinterpreted as a vidhi sutra. Thereby making this a generic prescription without the mention of any word bound specific condition and meaning bound specific condition which we see is part of the other rules. Now if you have this generic prescription any compound usage can be accommodated with this particular rule. Such a samasa is termed kebala samasa or supsup samasa by the later panimian grammatical tradition. This is how the panimian grammatical tradition solved the problem of the shortness of the sutras and the increase in the usage. The second solution is the concept of open-ended word-backs also known as akrati-gana. So, new compound words which are similar to the ones already listed in the ganas are accommodated as part of the same list. So, they are called sarupa-akrati. That is the primary intention of this being an open-ended word-back. So, akrati which is similar attracts the similar words into this particular bag which are not actually formally stated. However, then this word-back takes a different shape when new words dissimilar to the ones already listed are also accommodated as part of the same list which can be called as virupa-akrati whose form does not match with the form of the words already part of the back. Yet, those are included in the same bag and that makes this bag an open-ended word-back. We have an example, mayura-bhyam sakadhi stated in the sutra, mayura-bhyam sakadhyascha 2.172. Mayura-bhyam sakadhi is such a list where initially this takes the shape of collecting the sarupa-akrati words but later on we also see several virupa-akrati words also being dumped in this particular bag making it an open-ended word-back. So, if we study the mayura-bhyam sakadhi gana we'll find sarupa-akrati words like mayura-bhyam sakadhi, uchcha-bhacha, nishchap-pracha, ak-in-chana, etc. and then we find virupa-akrati. ashnita-pibhata, khadata-modhata, ehi-dh, ehi-pacha, jahi-joda, jahi-sthambh and also ak-kuto-bhaya all these are virupa-akrati. Mayura-bhyam sakadhi, uchcha-bhacha, nishchap-pracha, and ak-in-chana, these are the compounds where both the elements of the compounds are sups. Mayura and bhyam sakadhi, uchcha and abhacha, nishcha, nish and pracha, and eh and kinshana. These are all sups. Whereas in ashnita-pibhata, khadata-modhata, both of them are things which is completely different than what is stated, than what is the basic foundational principle. Still, these words are put in this particular bag of Mayura-bhyam sakadhi. Same is the case with ehi-eeda, ehi-pacha, jahi-joda and jahi-sthambh, where there is one element which is atinganta. And finally, we have a statement in the traditional commentators who say, abhihita-laksanas-takpurusho, mayura-bhyam sakadhi-su, drashta-vahaa. A takpurusha compound, which is not specifically prescribed by any of the available Paninian sutras, should be seen as part of the mayura-bhyam sakadhi bag. Abhihita-laksanas-takpurusho, mayura-bhyam sakadhi-su, drashta-vahaa. This statement makes it further open-ended. Any takpurusha for which you will not find any sutra, supporting it, generating it, should be put into this particular bag, whether it matches formally with mayura-bhyam sakadhi or not, doesn't matter. That is the technique the traditional commentators have resorted to. We have similar such akruti ganas, like paraskara-prabhruti-nicha, saudhnya-yam, in 6.157. Sushama-deshucha, in 8.398. Kshubhna-deshucha, 8.439. And also we have ardharchahapumsicha, in 2.431. All these elements dealing with different aspects. For example, ardharchahapumsicha deals with the gender of the compound and clubs together, similar words and then also some other types of words together. Kshubhna-deshucha is the bag of exceptions where the retroflex does not happen. Sushama-deshucha is the bag of words where the retroflex in the form of shah happens and so on. Let us now study the break-up of the sutras, which is yoga-vibhaga, as one of the means resorted to by the tradition. We once again take up sahasopa, 2.14. And we know that all the rules will be constrained by the conditions stated in this particular sutra. Say if you have two paddas with sup's at the end, we say yes for the process of compounding in accordance with 2.14. But if you have sup plus thing or thing plus thing, then in accordance with 2.4, the system says no to such elements. But to accommodate certain usage of precisely this kind, this rule is broken into two parts. 2.14A is sahar and 2.14B is supah. This is how the rule is broken. So what is the meaning of sahar? Sahar means width. So the sutra 2.14A means a sup can be compounded with any word without any restraining condition. A sup can be compounded with any word, which is semantically related. So now if you have sup over here and thing over here, this is also okay as far as 2.14A is concerned. And so you have examples like anu vachalat and pariyabhushayat, where you have anu and v and chala and in pari and bhusha, where anu, v and pari, these are the sup's, achalat and abhushayat, these are the things. So sup and thing also get compounded. However, we must note that there are only a few exceptions in the Vedic data of this kind which need to be accommodated in this particular manner. Nonetheless, the tradition had to do the yoga vibhaga as one of the means. Similar is the case of the sutra 2.16, which is a very big sutra. It reads something like this, avyayam, vibhakti, samipa, etc. And then this is broken into two, avyayam and the rest. And then any avyaya is compounded with any other subanta. Similarly, we have 2.111 and the sutra is vibhasha apu parivahiranchava panchammya. And vibhasha is broken as the separate sutra and now this vibhasha is considered as an adhikara. And all the compounds stated hereafter, they are optional compounds. That means the compounds and the sentences, both are possible. That means the compounds are not nitya samasa and so on. Similarly, all the vibhakti tattpurushas stated in 2.1, starting with vitiya ashrita, titapatita, tattyasta, praptapan nahi, and so on. Turtiya tattkrataarthe na vana bachane na, chaturthi tadarthartha bali hita sukharakshi taihi, panchammy bhaena, shashthi, and saptami shaun daihi. All these sutras, they can be also potentially broken up into two to account for other compounds which are not accounted by the existing rules for different reasons. We also see that there are new statements coming up in order to account for the varied usage. So for example, supamsuppa tinga naamna dhatuna atha tingam tinga. This is a new statement. This verse captures different scenarios where compounding is seen to have occurred, like supamsuppa, this is a common one. But supam tinga, not stated by panini, supam naamna, not explicitly stated by panini, supam dhatuna, not stated by panini, and tingam tinga, not stated by panini. But these new statements do account for some of the forms that we have already seen in the Mayura Vyamsakadi Akruti Gana, where we had ting plus ting compounded and so on. Some of the situations do not match with the rules stated in the panini and grammar, but that is what is captured over here in this particular half verse. Similarly, we have, gadikara kopapada naam krudbhissah samasabhachanam praksabhut pattehe, a new statement. This statement notes down the fact that in many cases, the compounding is happening not between two supps, but rather between one sup and one prathipadika, which ends in a kruth suffix, before the second sup suffix is added to it. So, this is the general condition that this is a sup, and then this should also be a sup, and then these supps should get compounded. But what happens over here is that this sup is compounded only with this kruth, before we add the sup to it. This is an exception. A sup and a kruthanta prathipadika is compounded, and so we get the forms like vyagra and vyagri, kachapa and kachapi. In these cases, one sup is not compounded with another sup, one sup is compounded with another kruth. That is what this statement says. So, gati, karaka and upapadas, these three, they are compounded samasabhachanam with kruth suffixes. Before prak, the sup is generated after those kruthanta forms. So, this statement accounts for several upapada-tatpurusha samasas, which we shall study in detail in this particular course in the later part. There are also new arguments that we find in the tradition. So, for example, shashti samasa is stated in order to explain the seemingly semantically chaturthi samasa. Since there is only one sutra which prescribes chaturthi samasa, there is an acute problem for capturing more usages. So, the tradition has developed an argument of interpreting the meaning of the chaturthi-vibhakti as generic relation, sambandhasamanya. Then it comes in the realm of the shashti samasa and then you can interpret it as shashti-tatpurusha by applying the sutra shashti and deriving a shashti-tatpurusha compound. Many compounds are explained by commentators in this particular fashion. For example, food for horse and you have the compound ashva-ghasah, which is actually ashpaya-ghasah, food for horse. But now because there is no explicit sutra which can be quoted to have accounted for this particular samasa as chaturthi-tatpurusha, the compound is interpreted as ashva-sir-ghasah and not the food for horse, but food of horse. This of indicates generic relation between horse and food. It could be anything. In this case it is obviously for, but that is not explicitly stated by the words. And this argument is resorted to account for several compounds of this kind. To summarize, compounding is a very productive process in Sanskrit. It has been there since the Vedas and we have the Vedic compounds also explained by the Vedas themselves. Panini has captured the data of his time and the tradition has considered the grammar of Panini as authoritative and the tradition has tried to explain the later data in the light of the grammar of Panini. But the later data is varied and does not fit in the existing system. And then the tradition figures out some solutions by interpreting the same sutra etc. All those things we have seen in this lecture. However, we think that new system in consonance with the existing grammar should be evolved in order to account for these new data. These are the texts that are referred to and from now on we shall delve deep into the Tathpurusha compound and we shall study the sutras prescribing the Tathpurusha compound in the coming lectures. Thank you for your patience.