 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, Vishvesham Satchidanandam Vandeham Yo Khilan Jagat Charikarthi Bari Bharati Sanjariharthi Leelaya Vishvesham Satchidanandam Vandeham Yo Khilan Jagat Charikarthi Bari Bharati Sanjariharthi Leelaya In the previous lecture, we studied what is a Karaka and in conclusion of that particular lecture, we said that Karaka theory forms the core of the structure of the sentence. We also said that there are two levels visible within the Paninian grammar as far as theoretical points of view are concerned. The first one is the Karaka level and the second one is the Samartha level. So, in this particular lecture, we are going to address the question namely, what is Samartha? Samartha is a very popular word. Most of us might have also heard this word and might have also used this word profusely in the daily communication. But when it is used in Paninian grammar in a particular technical sense, it becomes extremely important for us to try and understand what the meaning assigned is to this particular word in Paninian grammar. In the previous lecture, when we studied the Karaka theory, we said that the Karaka theory is the base and Samartha theory is based on this particular Karaka theory. We have already studied the six Karakas. We also figured out how these Karakas get expressed by respective Vibhaktis, thereby also indicating the interrelation of words in the sentence. And it is precisely this interrelation of the words which feeds into the theory of compounding. It is this interrelation which is what feeds into the theory of Samartha. So, let us try to understand what is Samartha. There are two straight away available meanings of Samartha. One is capable of. This meaning is also popularly known, Samartha, capable of. And the second meaning, however, is little bit more technical, which means having the same meaning. Samaha Arthaha. So, there are two words which are compounded over here, Samaha and Arthaha. Obviously, somebody would question when the word Samaha ends in short ar and the word Artha, which begins with short ar and when these two Akaras are placed in each other's vicinity as environment, generally the Savaranadir Ghasandhi should and would take place and would give us Samartha as the output. But the tradition has explained that this does not happen in this case. There is a Pararupa Sandhi that happens in this particular instance. And so we get Samaha Arthaha, Samarthaha having the same meaning. Both these meanings, they have an important role to play as far as the theory of compounding is concerned and as far as the Samartha theory is concerned. Let us try to see what this implies, what these two meanings say about the theory of compounding. First, let us try to understand how the meaning capable of plays an important role. How is it related to the theory of compounding? And the answer is the following. Capable of means capable of expressing the interconnected, interrelated meanings. So, we need to understand that a word unit is capable of expressing the interconnected meanings would be the compound. So, this is what is Samartha. So, there are interconnected meanings stated separately in the sentence and when the process of compounding happens and these separated words are merged together and one output is generated. This generated one output should be capable of expressing the same interconnected meaning which the two separated words are expressing in the context of a sentence. This is what is the implication of the meaning capable of which is assigned to the word Samartha. What this implies is the following, a Pratipadika which is a nominal root. This Pratipadika is considered to be not Samartha as it cannot express the interconnected meanings on its own without the Pratyaya getting added to it. Because it is the job of this Pratyaya to denote the interconnection of this Pratipadika with the other words in the sentence. When this Pratyaya is added which is of a particular kind namely a subanta or namely a sup or a thing which makes a padha and it is this sup or a thing which denotes the interconnection between two words which are part of the sentence. So, a Pratipadika to which a Pratyaya is added and then amongst these two the meaning of the Pratyaya becomes the head and this meaning of this Pratyaya is primarily the interrelation between the Pratipadika and the other word in the sentence. So far we have seen several examples in which the Pratyaya express the Karaka relation which is primarily the interrelation between a Pratipadika and the action denoted by the verbal root that is the role the Pratyaya is playing. What this amounts to is that a Pratipadika is not Samartha. It has to be a padha. When the Pratipadika becomes a padha then it becomes Samartha. So, in general we can say that it has to be a padha and padha is defined in Paninian grammar as subtingantam padam. A subanta and a tinganta is termed padha. So, a subanta and a tinganta is capable of expressing the interconnected meanings. This is the very broad outlook of the Samartha theory. The subanta and a tinganta they are capable of expressing the interconnected meanings. Having said that the theory of compounding in Sanskrit primarily restricts itself to dealing with the subantas and that is why on this slide we mentioned only the Pratipadika and the Pratyaya added to it and not the dhatu and the suffix thing added to it. However, in order to understand the overall general structure of the sentence we need to keep in mind that the padha is considered to be Samartha and padha is of two types in Paninian grammar a subanta and a tinganta. They are Samarthas and Paninian grammar straight away excludes tingantas from getting compounded. So, it is the domain of subantas that remains and then it is within this domain that the compounding process happens and therefore we need to note down that the Samartha theory primarily deals with the subantas. It takes two subantas primarily as input and generates the compound which is termed as Pratipadika. So, here is an example. You have a sentence Ramaha kashim gacchati which means Ram goes to Kashi in this sentence and the sentence meaning Ram is linked with the action of going by the verbal root gamma which is part of gacchati and Ram is linked to this action of going as the doer of the action of going namely the agent or Karthru and Kashi is linked with the action of going denoted by the verbal root gamma which is part of gacchati as destination as an object. So, Kashi is playing the role of Karman. So, here we note that Rama as Pratipadika, Kashi as Pratipadika denotes certain meanings but it is only this Pratyaya, aha and am which is linking the meaning of Rama and the meaning of Kashi to the meaning of gamma gacchati. This is how the Pratyaya meaning is getting interlinked. So, Rama and gamma as well as Kashi and gamma are interlinked. Now the Panimian grammar shows this kind of interlinkage, this kind of interconnection and then restricts the process of compounding in a particular manner. Why this is restricted is primarily because speakers of Sanskrit have never thought about doing this particular process. In this particular domain that is primarily the reason but there is something for the modern compound expressions in which a sup and thing in Panimian terms is also treated as a compound entity. Namely the complex predicates in modern Indian languages where a noun plus verb and other parts of speech plus verb they are termed as compound verbs. Now in this particular case as far as the theory of Samasa stated in the Panimian grammar, Ramaha and Gacchati they are interrelated but they are not eligible to become pounded because they both are not ending it in sup's. So, Ramaha is ending in a sup but Gacchati is ending in a thing. Kashim is ending in a sup but Gacchati is ending in a thing. And therefore Ramaha and Gacchati and Kashim and Gacchati even though are interlinked they are not eligible to be compounded. This is the strict restriction and straight restriction that is put by the speakers of Sanskrit because they have never thought about of compounding such two elements in this particular fashion and the grammar of Panini has also not thought about and has not discovered such elements undergoing the same process of compounding. So, Ramaha and Gacchati are ending in sup's that is another important point but what is to be remembered over here is that they are not directly interlinked and therefore they are not samarthas and therefore they are not eligible to become pounded because there is no interlink between the two. So, the interconnection, interrelation, interlinkage between the padas is what is the primary condition for the process of compounding to take place. This is what is primarily highlighted by the Samartha theory and this is what is based on the Karaka theory that we have studied so far. Let us take another example. Ramaha, Kashim, Yanen, Gacchati. This means Rama goes to Kashi by a car. Now, in this case we also see that there is an additional word Yanen in this particular sentence which is also linked with the action of going, Yanen. So, here we have the suffix which is linked with the meaning of the action of going and so there is this interlinkage that is happening. So, Yanen and the action of going denoted by the verbal root Gamma. Yanen is a pratipadika. Gamma is the verbal root and the interrelation between these two elements is denoted by this suffix Inna in this case. And so now Yanen which is a Subanta is becoming interlinked and then Yanen can become Samartha which can then feed into the theory of compounding. But in this particular case even though Yanen and Gacchati these two Subantas are interlinked we cannot have the compound between these two because they both are not ending in soaps. Whereas Yanen is ending in a soap, Gacchati is ending in a thing and therefore they even though semantically linked will not become eligible for the process of compounding. So interlinkage interrelation of meanings happens to be a primary condition and the secondary condition happens to be the case that both such words need to be Subantas. This is being highlighted over here because later on there are some examples where as exceptions we find such and similar instances of compounds they could be explained because of the basic construction and basic tenet of the process of compounding which is based on the interpretation of Samartha over here. So Rama, Kashi and Yanen are ending in soaps as we observed earlier but the point which is very crucial is that they are not interlinked amongst themselves directly. Rama is linked with the action of going as Kartha Kashi is linked with the action of going as Karma and Yanen is linked with the action of going as Karana but Rama is not linked with Kashi, Rama is not linked with Yanen, Kashi is not linked with Yanen and so on. So these three are not interlinked and therefore they are not termed Samartha and therefore they are not eligible to be compounded. You cannot say Rama, Kashi, Yanen. This is not possible because these three are semantically not interconnected. Now we increase the sentence by adding some more words indicating some more Karakas. Earlier we had Ramaha, Kashi, Mghachati then we added Yanen. Now let us add three more words, Pujanaya, Prayagat and Kartikamase. Pujanaya is Chaturthi, Prayagat is Panchami and Kartikamase is Saptami. So what this sentence means is the following. Rama goes to Kashi by a car in the month of Kartika from Prayagat for worship. Repeat, Rama goes to Kashi by a car in the month of Kartika from Prayagat for worship. Now along with Rama, Kashi and Yanen in this sentence Pujanaya, Prayagat and Kartikamase they are also linked with the action of going denoted by the verbal root gamma as Sampradana, Apadana and Adhikarana respectively. So Pujana is a Prathipadika and Aaya is the Prathyaaya, Prayag is the Prathipadika, Adh is the Prathyaaya, Kartikamase is the Prathipadika, E is the Prathyaaya. Now this E, this Adh and this Aaya, they are linked with the action of going and they are showing the interrelation of Pujana with the action of going, Prayag with the action of going and Kartikamase with the action of going. This is how they are interrelated. But even though this interrelation exists like Rama, Kashi and Yanen, Pujana, Prayag and Kartikamase each one of them cannot be compounded with gamma because they both are not ending in sups. Ujanaaya and Gacchati, Prayagat and Gacchati, Kartikamase and Gacchati, these pairs they do not have both the Subandhas. Like Rama, Kashi and Yanen, Ujana, Prayag and Kartikamase are ending in sups but they are not directly interlinked and therefore they are not Samarthas. You cannot have Pujana, Prayag, Kartikamase compounded in this particular context because they are not Samarthas, they are not interlinked. Whereas Pujanaaya and Gacchati are interlinked so they are in a way technically Samarthas but the second condition of Subandhas prohibits compound with these two as the base and so we can say that Pujana, Prayag and Kartikamase are not Samarthas and therefore are not eligible to be compounded. To recap, we have the sentence Ramahakashim, Yanen, Pujana, Pujanaaya, Prayagat, Kartikamase, Gacchati a sentence with all the Karakas getting represented by respective Vibhaktis. Here we have Ramahakashim, Yanen, Pujanaaya, Prayagat, Kartikamase, Gacchati these plus signs and these square brackets are to show the individual unit which has formed this particular sentence and in these units we will have further units. So for example, in Ramaha we will have Rama plus Su, in Kashim we will have Kashi plus Am, in Yanena we have Yana plus Ta, in Pujanaaya we have Pujana plus Ne, in Prayagat we have Prayag plus Nasi, in Kartikamase we have Kartikamase plus Ne and in Gacchati we have Gama plus Ti and there are interlinkages between these brackets and we can show that all these earlier brackets they are interlinked with this bracket and all these Am, Ta, Ne, Nasi and Ne, all of them they are linking the meanings of the Pratipadikas with the meaning of the verbal root, all of them and this is how there is the interrelation between the padas. Su is directly linked with this Ti, so in a way all the words in the sentence they are linked with Gacchati but none of them is linked with each other. So for example, Su and Am they are not linked, Am and Ta they are not interlinked and so on and so forth and therefore Rama, Su and Kashi plus Am they are not eligible to be compounded. However, we also note that Ramaha and Gacchati, Kashi and Gacchati even though are interrelated and so can become eligible for compounding, do not become eligible for compounding because of the second necessary condition namely that both the padas have to be Subantas. So here are the observations. In the examples that we have seen so far we have noticed that Su and Am they are interlinked but even though they are interlinked they are not compounded. The meanings of the nominal roots playing different roles in the accomplishment of the action denoted by the verbal root are linked to the meaning of the verbal root but are not compounded when the verbal root ends in a thing. This is very, very crucial and very important and so we will highlight the fact that the meanings of the nominal roots playing different roles in the accomplishment of the action denoted by the verbal root are linked to the meaning of the verbal root but are not compounded when the verbal root ends in a thing. Obviously when it ends in some other suffix for example, Krith then these meanings of the nominal roots playing different roles in the accomplishment of the action denoted by the verbal root are linked to the meaning of the verbal root and they will be compounded with the verbal root which ends in a Krith and this is what we shall study when we study further the Vibhakti Tatpurushas and also the Upapada Tatpurushas and some other examples of Tatpurusha compound in this particular course. The second observation is that the meanings of the nominal roots playing different roles in the accomplishment of the action denoted by the verbal root which are linked to the meaning of the verbal root are not interlinked with each other directly and hence they are not Samartha and hence are not eligible for compounding. This is also extremely important. In conclusion, we can say that the Karaka system is at the base of the process of compounding only as a very general and basic background. There are still some constraints in which the process of compounding will be based on the Karaka system. So the Karaka system provides the skeleton structure of the sentence as far as meaning is concerned and also the Vibhakti, the sentence structure is concerned. The most important fact to be remembered over here is that this sentence which is based on the Karaka system can stand on its own without there being any compound inside. This is for sure but it is this same structure which also holds the load of the compounds. This is also very true because the compounds they get fitted into this very basic structure. So the compounding as a process is based on the Karaka's as an input and the output which is the compound which once again gets fitted into the system of Karaka's and this aspect and other aspects we shall study in the coming lectures in this particular course. These are our references, the traditional sources that we shall be referring to constantly. Thank you very much.