 Welcome. I welcome you all to this lecture in the course, Samasa in Paninian Grammar 2. As is our practice, we begin our lecture with the recitation of the Mangala Charana. Vishvesham Satchidanandam, Vandeham Yo Khilan Jagat, Charikarthi Bari Bharati, Sanjari Harthi Leelaya. In the previous lecture, we have studied what is Samartha. We said earlier that Samartha has got two meanings, one capable of and the second one having the same meaning Samaha Arthaha. And in the previous lecture, we saw where the capability of expressing the interconnected meanings of words lies in which situations. We noted down three such situations in the previous lecture. Before that, we also stated as to where there is no interrelation and therefore there is no capability of expressing the interconnected meaning. We also earlier noted that there are interconnected words but they cannot be compounded primarily because both of them are not subantas. So, the Pratyayas suffixes denoting different karagas, connect the Pratipatika with the verbal root with the suffix thing and then there is interconnectedness. However, these two are not eligible for compounding in Sanskrit as a general rule because both of them do not end in ting, both of them do not end in sup. There is one word amongst them which ends in ting and therefore it cannot be compounded with the other word. This we have studied. Now, let us revisit it. The first meaning of Samartha is capable of expressing the interconnected meanings. What it means is that a word unit is capable of expressing the interconnected meanings. So, typically a Pratipatika is not considered to be Samartha as it cannot express the interconnected meanings on its own without Pratyayas getting added to it. In one of the earlier lectures where we discussed about the meanings where we stated that there is prakrityartha, there is pratyayartha and then there is samsargartha. This is what we highlighted and we stated that the interconnected meanings are the ones which primarily depend on the pratyayartha. So, a Pratipatika is not Samartha as it cannot express the interconnected meanings on its own without the Pratyayas getting added to it. So, a Pratipatika has to be a padha that is it has to be a subantha. Only then it can express interconnected meanings. Similarly, a thingantha also is capable of expressing the interconnected meanings. Now, let us focus on the second meaning of Samartha having the same meaning samaha arthaha. What this means is that interlinked interconnected subanthas are eligible to be compounded. Then they undergo the process of compounding stated step by step in paninian grammar involving several types of operations stated in paninian grammar by different rules. And thus deriving the compound step by step with the help of rules laid down once again in the paninian grammar and will generate output in the form of a nominal root which is a Pratipatika which will mean the same as interlinked subanthas where we started the process. So, the interlinked subanthas which are eligible to be compounded and the output generated in the form of a nominal root will mean the same, will have the same meaning. This is what is the second explanation of the word samartha, samaha arthaha. The compounded output meaning will be one unit but it will be same as that of the interlinked subanthas. This is the second important explanation of the word samartha which is applied in the theory of compounding. In this relation it is important for us to study the concept of samartha or samartha tha where the paninian grammatical tradition discusses two types of samartha. In this lecture we shall discuss these two types of samartha's quoting the relevant source namely the Vyakarana Mahabhashya. We are quoting from a particular anjika called samartha anjika which is entirely devoted to the explanation of the sutra samartha padavidhi ashtadhyayi 2.1.1. There is a very good English translation along with different types of notes and other explanations of this samartha anjika written by S.D. Joshi which was published by the erstubile University of Pune. So now Vyapeksha and Ekarthibhav these are the two types of samartha's involved in the process of compounding. Patanjali in his Mahabhashya explains the word samartha in four ways. Sangatārtha samartha, samsrish tārtha samartha, samprekshitārtha samartha, and sambhadhārtha samartha. Sangatārtha samartha is first explanation which means when two meanings go together. That is one explanation of samartha where the preverb sam is interlinked with an action of going. The second explanation of samartha is samsrish tārtha which means merged together. Here the word sam is interlinked with the verbal root srija and the meaning is interlinked or merged. Samprekshitārtha is the third explanation of the word samartha as proposed by Patanjali in his Mahabhashya. This means the meanings which are seen together. So sam is related to the action of seeing denoted by the verbal root ekṣa with the preverb pra in the word samprekshitā. And finally samvadhārtha is the fourth explanation of the word samartha. This means meanings which are tied together, samvadha tied together. Here the preverb sam is related to the action of time denoted by the verbal root bandha and this is what is sampadhārtha. These are the four explanations of the word samartha and we shall study them now with the help of the original primary source. Namely the Vyākarana Mahabhashya of Patanjali, more specifically the samarthāṇika. And these are the quotations and explanations. Now Patanjali says, So earlier we saw that the samarthya is stated to be of two types, ekārthi bhava and vyapeksha. And then we saw that Patanjali offers four explanations of the word samarthā. Here in this particular passage Patanjali is showing which two explanations apply to ekārthi bhava. Patanjali is also giving examples which will make the meaning of the word ekārthi bhava clearer. What Patanjali says here is So when ekārthi bhava is the samarthya is what is the meaning of the word samarthā, then the vigraha of the word samarthā would be done in two ways out of the four, namely sangatārthā and samśrītārthā. Meaning which are going together and meaning which are merged together. That is what is samarthā. That is samgatam gṛtam, samgatam taylam iti ucchate, ekībhutam iti gamyate, samgatam gṛtam, the ghee which is mixed, the ghee which is merged, the ghee which goes together. And similarly the oil which also is merged, ekībhutam has become one with that particular element in which ghee and oil is poured. So they become one in that particular element. This is what is ekārthi bhava. What this gives us is that the meaning of ekārthi bhava is merging together. Two meanings becoming one. They go together, they are merged together. Now let us go to the second bullet on the slide in which Patanjali explains vyapīkṣā lakṣana samarthya. He says, yadā vyapīkṣā samarthyaṁ tada evam vigraha kriṣyate, samprekshitārthah samarthah and sambaddhārthah samarthah iti. When samarthya will be intended to be vyapīkṣā, then the word samarthya will be dissolved in the following two manners out of the four stated earlier. Samprekshitārthah and sambaddhārthah. The meanings which are seen together and the meanings which are tied together. So this is very important. There are some meanings which are tied with each other. There are some meanings which are seen together. This does not mean that those meanings are going together as one unit and that they are getting merged into one unit. They are tied with each other. They are seen together. Which means that they are interrelated and they are also seen together. This interrelatedness is the meaning of samarthah when we use the word vyapīkṣā and when we use the word ekārthibhava, two meanings and two words getting merged together is what is the meaning intended in this particular passage. As far as ekārthibhava is concerned, Patanjali uses the sentence ekibhutam itigammyate. But that is not the case as far as vyapīkṣā samarthya is concerned. So we see that the two meanings of samarthah, namely ekārthibhava and vyapīkṣā, they get proper explanation as far as Patanjali is concerned also with some examples. Now let us study ekārthibhava in some detail. And once again we are quoting the Patanjali Mahābhāshya, namely the samarthāṇika. So first the question is asked, kim samartham nāma? What is samarth? And the answer provided is prthagarthanāma ekārthibhava samarthavacanam prthagarthanāma ekārthibhava samarthavacanam This is further explained in the next sentence prthagarthanāma padānāma ekārthibhava samarthamiti ucchate. So different meanings when they become one that is what is called samarthah. So the padhas, the words which have different meanings when their meanings become one then that is called samarthah. Patanjali further explains this. vākhya prthagarthāni rādñahā purushahā iti In the sentence the padhas have different meanings, rādñahā and purushahā. They are independent of each other. They have different features, formal as well as semantic. And however they are interlinked but they are prthak. This is the state of vākhya. Now in samāsā samāsē punar ekārthāni In samāsā the two words in the sentence become one meaning denoting word. So ekārthāni and the word is rāja purusha. So rādñahā and purushahā they get merged ekibhutam in the samāsā. And that is what is ekārthi bhava samarthya which is the base of samāsā. So rāja purusha is the example in which two words are shown to be merged in whose meaning is also merged together. This is what is ekārthi bhava. What is the distinction between ekārthi bhava and vyāpeksha? Well Patanjali has number of factors to show in this particular context. He asked the questions and begins the discussion. What difference is made by the ekārthi bhava? And the answer is and swaraha. Subha lupu is the non-deletion of the sup pratyayā. Vyavadhāna is the inter-relation. Yateshtam anyatareda avi samvandhā is the order of the words and also the relation of other words. Swaraha is the accent. Now let us see how Patanjali explains each one of them in detail. Supaha alopo bhavati vākhye. This is the explanation of Subha lopo. Patanjali says supaha alopo bhavati vākhye. Rādnyak purusha iti. Samāse punarna bhavati rāja purusha iti. In the sentence, sup in rādnyaha and purushaha retains itself. Whereas in the samāsā, this sup is deleted. In the sentence, there is existence of sup which is not there as far as the samāsā is concerned. Even though Patanjali gives the examples of swasti takpurusha samāsā, these features are applicable across all the samāsās. Namely, avyai bhava, bahuvrihi and duvandva which is the main concern of our course. However, these fundamentals need to be revisited even while studying these three samāsās. And that is the reason why we have revisited these primary sources in order to understand the process of compounding that is stated in the Paninian grammar. The distinction between ekārthi bhava and pepeksha is being discussed over here where Subha lopo is the first distinction stated by Patanjali. Let us now look at the second distinction which is Vyavadhāna intervention. So Patanjali says, vyavadhānaṁ ca bhavati vākhie. In the sentence, two words which are interlinked, they may have an intervention of another word. So rādnyapurushaha are the two interlinked words and they may have a word ruddhāsya coming in between them. Rādnyā ruddhāsya purushahā. But this is not allowed in samāsā, samāsai nā bhavati. Rājapurusha, you cannot have rājā ruddhāsya purusha, no, that is not possible. Rājapurusha is a merged entity with a different identity now as one unit. So there is no scope of any intervention. This is an important distinction stated by Patanjali. Now, let us look at the third distinction which is yatheshtam anyatarena abhi sambandho bhavati vākhie. In the sentence, the sequence or the order of words may change. So you may have rādnyapurushaha or you may also change the order and you may say purusho rādnyā and both these sets of words will denote the same meaning. But you cannot do this as far as samāsā is concerned, samāsai nā bhavati, rājapurusha iti. You cannot have purusha rājā in the same meaning of rādnyā purushahā. So you cannot have the yatheshtam anyatarena abhi sambandho in the samāsā. Therefore, the order is fixed in the samāsā. This is the third distinction between ekārthi bhava and vyapekṣā as explained by Patanjali. Now let us look at the next fourth distinction stated by Patanjali, namely svarā or accent. dvau svarau bhavato vāke. In the sentence, there are two accents. Each padha has got one accent. rādnyā has got one accent and purushahā also has got one accent. But when both these padhas get merged together to form one different entity as one unit, then we have only one accent on this one entity. So Patanjali says, samāsai punar ek evar svaraha. In samāsau, there is only one svarā on rājapurusha. This is a very important distinction between the ekārthi bhava and vyapekṣā samarthya. vyapekṣā is the inter-relation, inter-linkage of the words. And ekārthi bhava is when the words get merged together to form a different unit as one unit. Now there are more distinctions stated by Patanjali. He says, himetar hi ekārthi bhava krta viṣeṣāha. Sankhya viṣeṣāha vyaktābhidhānam look upasarjana viṣeṣānam ca yoga iti. These are the distinctions. Sankhya viṣeṣāha. Specific particular number is understood in the sentence and not in the samāsai. vyaktābhidhānam explicit expression which is a feature of sentence and this may be missing in the compound. Look is deletion upasarjana viṣeṣānam the qualification of the qualify. So qualification of the qualification is possible as far as the sentence is concerned but not the samāsai. And ca yoga, the association of the word ca which is possible in the sentence but not in the samāsai. These are some more distinctions further explained by Patanjali in his Samarthanika. Let us look at them one by one. Sankhya viṣeṣāha. So Patanjali says Sankhya viṣeṣau bhavati vākhye. You can say rādhyapurushaha the servant of one king or you can say rādhyahopurushaha the servant of two kings or you can say rādhyampurushaha the man of three kings, the servant of three kings. So in the sentence you can express the number distinctly by using different case endings but this you cannot do in the samāsai. If you say rādhyapurushaha you do not know whether this is the king's man, whether this man is the servant of one king or two kings or three kings. This is not clear which is clear as far as the sentence is concerned. The next distinction is vyaktā-bhidhānam. So Patanjali says vyaktā-bhidhānam bhavati vākhye. In the sentence there is explicit expression. The example is given brahmanasya kambalas tishthati iti. The rug of a brahman stays samāsai punar avyaktam brahmana kambalas tishthati. What is the relation between the brahmana and kambala? This is not explicitly expressed as far as the samāsai is concerned. So Patanjali says sandeha-bhavati sambuddhyasyāt sasti samāsau vā iti. There is scope of doubt as to whether the word brahmana is the vocative case or whether this is a sasti samāsai. So there is no explicit expression. In the sentence brahmanasya kambalas tishthati there is explicit use of the case which expresses clearly the relation of brahmana with the kambala. This is the additional distinction between ekārthi bhava and vepeksha. The next distinction is upasarjana-viseshanam, the qualification of the subordinate or qualification. So Patanjali says upasarjana-viseshanam bhavati vākya. In the sentence you can add a qualification and adjective to a subordinate word or a qualification. Like ruddhasya-radhniha-porushaha. So when radhniha is subordinate with porushaha you can add the word ruddhasya which is linked with radhniha. But you cannot do this in samāsai. Samāsai nabhavati, rājapurusha iti, you cannot say ruddhāsya rājapurushaha. This is not allowed in the samāsai. And finally we have chayoga. So chayoga bhavati vākya. The association of chā is possible in a sentence. Swachayogaha, swami chayogascha. The association of chā with respect to what is owned. And swami chayogaha, the association of the word chā with respect to the owner. Here are examples of swachayoga. So if you say radhniha, gauhucha, asvashcha, porushascha iti. So radhniha indicates the owner. Gauhu, asvaha and porushaha is what is owned. So there is chā added after each one of them. Gauhucha, asvashcha and porushascha. So you can add chā after all the swas. This you cannot do in a compound. Samāsai, nābhavati, radhniha, gavāśva, porushāha. So go, asvā and porusha. When they are compounded, this is an example of dvandva samāsai. So when they are compounded, they will not be able to have the association of the word chā in between. You cannot say gavāśva, vascha, porushascha and something like that. That is not possible. Similarly, there is a case of swāmi chayoga. If there is one cow which is owned by devadatta, yajñadatta and vishnamitra, we can say devadatta śyacca, yajñadatta śyacca, vishnamitra śyacca, gauhu. So all the three can be added with the word chā. But this you cannot do in samāsai. Samāsai, nābhavati, devadatta, yajñadatta, vishnamitra, nābhavati. So there is a dvandva compound that is taking place of devadatta, yajñadatta and vishnamitra. And there is no scope of the association of the word chā in between. These are the distinctions between ekārkībhava and vyapekṣa. We have studied both these together with the primary source quoted from the Vyākarana Mahābhāshya of Patanjali, namely the Samarthānika. So to summarize we can say that Samarthya is of two types, which is interrelated and interdependent. Vyapekṣa indicates the interrelation of meanings at the sentence level with independent status of each unit. Ekārkībhava is based on these interrelated units as input and generates an output which is one unit where the constituents do not have independent status. The generated output has got something additional than the constituents as far as the meaning is concerned and also the word form is concerned. These are the texts referred to. Thank you very much.