Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pāṇinian accounts of the Vedic subjunctive:

leṭ kr̥ṇvaíte

  • Published:
Indo-Iranian Journal

Abstract

To determine which Vedic texts Pāṇini knew requires a comprehensive approach that establishes a high correlation between the complete set of linguistic traits his treatise describes and the complete set of linguistic traits exhibited in each text in question. The examination of individual linguistic traits is inadequate to determine which texts he knew because neither the Vedic nor the grammatical tradition is uniform and static. Bronkhorst (Pāṇinian Studies: Professor S. D. Joshi Felicitation Volume, p. 75, 1991) calls into question the assumption that Vedic texts were known to Pāṇini in the form we have received them, while Cardona (Pāṇinian Studies: Professor S. D. Joshi Felicitation Volume, p. 130, 1991) shows that Pāṇini’s silence concerning certain Vedic forms may be due to deference to certain received exegetical traditions. The current paper considers a case where the Pāṇinian grammatical tradition entertains disagreement over the derivation of obscure forms. Doubt concerning the recurrence of the term pit (3.4.92) into 3.4.94 brings into question whether Pāṇini systematically accounts for stem strengthening in the present subjunctive. Kātyāyana, Patañjali, Jayāditya, and Jinendrabuddhi remain silent on the point. Rāmacandra, Śrīkriṣṇa, and Bhaṭṭojidīkṣita assert that pit recurs, thereby allowing stem strengthening. Haradatta, on the other hand, maintains that a rule of indeterminate variation, 3.4.117 chandasy ubhayathā, accounts for it. Nāgeśa points out that the latter procedure is more comprehensive in that it accounts for the lack of stem strengthening in exceptional forms, such as kr̥ṇvaíte in the R̥gveda. The implication is that the former procedure fails to account for the form, which, if Pāṇini’s knowledge of texts were to be established based upon the consideration of individual traits, would imply the absurdity that Pāṇini, as interpreted by Rāmacandra et al. did not know the R̥gveda. On the contrary, however, the procedure of Rāmacandra et al. can employ another rule of indeterminate variation: 3.1.85 vyatyayo bahulam. This procedure, which provides a systematic explanation of the present subjunctive generally and requires a rule of indeterminate variation only to account for exceptional forms, is preferable to leaving the account of stem strengthening in the present subjunctive generally to a rule of indeterminate variation. Since both procedures rely on rules of indeterminate variation to account for the R̥gvedic form, however, it is impossible to establish either Pāṇini’s knowledge or ignorance of the text on the basis of his account of the subjunctive. The controversy demonstrates that the depth and variety of the Indian grammatical tradition must be taken into account in determining which rules describe which linguistic facts and that it is inadequate to consider individual traits. A comprehensive approach is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aithal, K. P. (1996). Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī and Vedic ritual literature. In D. B. Kapp (Ed.), Nānāvidhaikatā: Festschrift für Hermann Berger (pp. 1–7). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, B. P. (1986). Vedic grammar: Vaidikavyakaranam: Bhaṭṭojidīkṣitaviracitā Vaidikī Prakriyā: text, English translation, Sanskrit exposition, and exhaustive grammatical notes with illustrations. Calcutta: Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar.

  • Bhawe, S. S. (1953). Pāṇini’s rules and vedic interpretation. In Proceedings (and transactions) of the All-India oriental conference (vol. 17, pp. 231–240). (Ahmedabad, 1953).

  • Bhawe, S. S. (1955). Pāṇini’s rules and vedic interpretation. In S.K. Chatterji jubilee volume: presented on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday (26th November, 1955) (pp. 237–249). IL 16.

  • Bhawe, S. S. (1957–62). The soma hymns of the R̥gveda: a fresh interpretation. 3 vols. The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda Research Series 3, 5, 6. Baroda: Oriental Institute.

  • Bronkhorst, J. (1980). Theoretical aspects of Pāṇini’s grammar. Leiden: Leiden University. [Ph.D. diss. Leiden].

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronkhorst, J. (1981). The orthoepic diaskeuasis of the R̥gveda and the date of Pāṇini. Indo-Iranian Journal, 23, 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bronkhorst, J. (1991). Pāṇini and the Veda reconsidered. In M. M. Deshpande & S. Bhate (Eds.), Pāṇinian Studies: Professor S. D. Joshi Felicitation Volume (pp. 75–121). Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, University of Michigan, no. 37. Ann Arbor: The Univesity of Michigan Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies.

  • Bronkhorst, J. (1996). Pāṇini and the Kaṭhas. In H.-P. Schmidt & A. Wezler (Eds.), Veda-Vyākaraṇa-Vyākhyāna: Festschrift Paul Thieme zum 90. Geburtstag am 18. März 1995 dargebracht von Schülern, Freunden und Kollegen (pp. 59–65). StII 20.

  • Cardona, G. (1972). Review of Hoffmann (1967). Kratylos 15.1 (1970 [1972]): 47–51.

  • Cardona, G. (1984). On the Mahābhāṣya evidence for a Pāṇinīya Dhātupāṭha without meaning entries. In S. D. Joshi (Ed.), Am r̥tadhārā: Prof. R. N. Dandekar Felicitation Volume (pp. 79–84). Delhi: Ajanta Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardona, G. (1991). On Pāṇini, Śākalya, Vedic dialects and Vedic exegetical traditions. In M. M. Deshpande & S. Bhate (Eds.), Pāṇinian Studies: Professor S. D. Joshi Felicitation Volume (pp. 123–134).

  • Cardona, G. (1997a). Pāṇini: his work and its traditions. Vol. 1, Background and Introduction, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. 2d.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardona, G. (1997b). Vedic tradition and descriptions of grammarians. In M. Witzel (Ed.), Inside the Texts, Beyond the Texts: New Approaches to the Study of the Vedas (pp. 33–38). HOS Opera Minora 2. Cambridge: Department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies, Harvard University.

  • Cardona, G. (1997c). Escape rules in Pāṇini: Sūtras of the type ‘anyebhyo ’pi dr̥śyate’. In Xth World Sanskrit Conference, International Association of Sanskrit Studies, January 3–9, 1997, Taralabalu Kendra, Bangalore 560 032, India, English Abstracts, (pp. 412–413). New Delhi: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan.

  • Cardona, G. (1999). Recent Research in Pāṇinian Studies. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardona, G. (2005). Pāṇinian sūtras of the type anyebhyo ’pi dr̥śyate. In M. A. Dhaky & J. B. Shah (Eds.), Jambūjyoti: Munivara Jambūvijaya Festschrift (pp. 91–107). Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi volume 7. Ahmedabad: Shresthi Kasturbhai Lalbhai Smarak Nidhi, Sharadaben Chimanbhai Educational Research Centre.

  • Deshpande, M. M. (1991). Pāṇinian reflections on Vedic infinitives: On infinitives with -tosUN and -KasUN. In M. M. Deshpande (Ed.) Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit conference, Vol. V, Pāṇini and the Veda (pp. 19–31). Leiden: Brill.

  • Devasthali, G. V. (1963). Sāyaṇa utilising Pāṇini in his R̥g-veda bhāṣya. Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, new series, 38, 165–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devasthali, G. V. (1965). Pāṇini as an aid to R̥gvedic interpretation. In S. N. Gajendragadhkar & S. A. Upadhyay (Eds.), H.D. Velankar commemoration volume: a volume of Indological studies by his students presented to Professor H.D. Velankar on the occasion of his seventy-second birthday on 3rd October 1965 (pp. 20–26). Bombay: Professor H.D. Velankar Commemoration Volume Committee.

  • Devasthali, G. V. (1967). Pāṇini and R̥gvedic exegesis. Indian Antiquary, third series 2.3, 1-8.

  • Devasthali, G. V. (1968). Pāṇini and R̥gvedic exegesis. ABORI, 48–49, 7. [Reprint PCASS A 22].

    Google Scholar 

  • Dīkṣita, P. (1997). lakārāṇāṁ punarvyavasthāpanam. In Xth World Sanskrit Conference, International Association of Sanskrit Studies, January 3-9, 1997, Taralabalu Kendra, Bangalore: Sanskrit Abstracts, pp. 187–189. New Delhi: Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan. [Sanskrit].

  • Franke, R. O. (1891a). Review of Liebich 1891. Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen 1891: 951–983.

  • Franke, R. O. (1891b). Was ist Sanskrit? (Bezzenbergers) Beiträge zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen 17: 54–90. Göttingen.

  • Geldner, K. F. (1951). Der Rig-veda. Part 2. Harvard Oriental Series 34. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

  • Gopal Shastri. (1987). Aṣṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. Gopal Dutt Pande (Ed.), Chaukhamba Surbharati Granthamala 19. 3d. Vārāṇasī : Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashan.

  • Hoffmann, K. (1967). Der Injunktiv im Veda: Eine synchronische Funktionsuntersuchung. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, S. D., & Bhate, S. V. (1984). The Fundamentals of Anuvr̥tti. Pune: University of Poona. PCASS B9. Pune: University of Poona.

  • Kielhorn, L. F. (Ed.) (1985). The Vyākaraṇa-mahābhāṣya of Patañjali. 3 vols. Third edition revised and furnished with additional readings references and select critical notes by K. V. Abhyankar. Pune: BORI, 1962, 1965, 1972, Reprint: 1985.

  • Kiparsky, P. (1980). Pāṇini as a Variationist. S. D. Joshi (Ed.), Publications of the Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Class B, no. 6. Pune: Centre of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, University of Poona, in collaboration with the MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

  • Kuiper. (1965). Review of Bhawe 1957-62. Indo-Iranian Journal, 8, 245–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumārī, A. (1990-91). leṭ lakāra: eka vivecana. Kurukshetra University Research Journal: Arts and Humanities, 24-25, 330–340. [Hindi].

    Google Scholar 

  • Laddu, S. D. (1969). The laukika, vaidika and yājñika accentuation with the munitraya of Sanskrit grammar. In G. V. Devasthali (Ed.), Professor R. N. Dandekar felicitation volume (pp. 93–111). Indian Antiquary, third series 3. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.

  • Laddu, S. D. (1971a). Ancient Sanskrit grammarians and the literary records. Vishveshvaranand Indological Journal, 9, 315–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laddu, S. D. (1971b). Vedic forms and Pāṇini: a glance. In R̥ṣikalpanyāsa [Festshcrift Rajeshwar Shastri Dravid], English section, pp. 54–68.

  • Laddu, S. D. (1972). The device of contiguity as a key to interpreting Pāṇini’s rules. Center of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Studies (E), 1, 157–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebich, B. (1891). Pāṇini: ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der indischen Literatur und Grammatik. Leipzig: Haessel. [Reprint of chapter 5 In Staal 1972: 159-65.].

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubotsky, A. (1997). A R̥gvedic Word Concordance. 2 parts. American Oriental Series 82. New Haven, Connecticut: American Oriental Society.

  • Mayank, M. (1991). Pāṇini’s acquaintance with the Atharvaveda. In Madhav Murlidhar Deshpande (Ed.), Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit Conference, Vol. V, Pāṇini and the Veda (pp. 32–45). Leiden: Brill.

  • Meenakshi, K. (1991). Vedic infinitive and Pāṇini. In Madhav Murlidhar Deshpande (Ed.), Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit Conference, Vol. V, Pāṇini and the Veda (pp. 46–54). Leiden: Brill.

  • Mishra, J. (1994). Pāṇini’s approach to chandas. In B. Banerjee, M. K. Gangopadhyay, D. Ghosh & R. Basu (Eds.), Cultura Indica, Tributes to an Indologist: Professor Dr. Asoke Chatterjee Sastri (pp. 91–92). Delhi: Sharada Publishing House.

  • Miśra, M. (Ed.). (1980). Prakriyākaumudī by Rāmacandrācārya with Prakāśa by Śrīk r̥ṣṇa. [Rāmacandrācārya-praṇītā Prakriyākaumudī Śrīk r̥ṣṇa-viracitayā Prakāśa-vyākhyayā saṁvalitā.] Part 3. Sarasvatībhavana-granthamālā 112. Varanasi: Research Institute, Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishvavidyalaya.

  • Miśra, Ś. (Ed.). (1985). Kāśikāvr̥tti of Jayāditya and Vāmana: Along with Commentaries Vivaraṇapañcikā-Nyāsa of Jinendrabuddhi and Padamañjarī of Haradatta Miśra. 6 Parts. Varanasi: Ratna Publications.

  • Miśra, Ś., (Ed. trans.). (1986). Pāṇinīyavyākaraṇasūtravr̥tti Kāśikā of Vāmana and Jayāditya. Ed. with the Prakāśa Hindi Commentary and Introduction. 2 Parts. Kāśī Sanskrit Series 37. 6d. Vārāṇasī : Chaukhambha Sanskrit Sanasthan.

  • Nāgeśa. (1996, 1998, 1998). B r̥hat-śabdenduśekhara. [Nāgeśabhaṭṭa-viracito Br̥hacchabdenduśekharaḥ.] Ed. Śrī Sītārāmaśāstrī. 3 parts (continuously paginated). Sarasvatī bhavana-granthamālā 87. Varanasi: Research Institute, Sampurnanand Sanskrit University.

  • Palsule, G. B. (1972a). Pāṇini 3.4.87-8 vis-à-vis Vedic imperatives in -si. In B. R. Saksena, S. P. Chaturvedi & A. P. Misra (Eds.), K. C. Chaṭṭopādhyāya felicitation volume, (2 vols. paginated continuously 1971–72), vol. 2., pp. 443–53. Journal of the Ganganāth Jhā Kendrīya Sanskrit Vidyāpeeth 27.3/4, 28.1/2.

  • Palsule, G. B. (1972b). Pāṇini’s treatment of tense and mood formations. Center of Advanced Study in Sanskrit, Studies (E), 1, 173–183. [3.4.88].

    Google Scholar 

  • Palsule, G. B. (1982). Two Vedic rules of Pāṇini: 8.3.47 and 8.3.10. In T. N. Dharmadhikari (Ed.), tilaka-mahārāṣṭra-vidyāpīṭha-śākhābhūta vaidika-saṁśodhana-maṇḍalena prakāśitaḥ suvarṇamahotsava-granthaḥ [Golden Jubilee volume, Vaidika Sanaśodhana Maṇḍala] (pp. 185–188). Pune: Vaidika Sanaśodhana Maṇḍala.

  • Palsule, G. B. (1991). Pāṇini and the Vedic verbal system with special reference to the modal forms. In M. M. Deshpande (Ed.), Panels of the VIIth World Sanskrit Conference, Vol. V, Pāṇini and the Veda (pp. 55–64). Leiden: Brill.

  • Pansikar, V. L. S. (Ed.). (1985). The Siddhāntakaumudī with Tattvabodhinī commentary of Jñānendrasarasvatī and Subodhinī commentary of Jayakr̥ṣṇa. [Tattvabodhinī-samākhya-vyākhyā-saṁvalitā Siddhāntakaumudī nāma Bhaṭṭojidīkṣita-praṇītā pāṇinīya-vyākaraṇa-sūtra-vr̥ttiḥ. Jñānendrasarasvatī-viracitottarakr̥dantāntaṁ Tattvabodhinī-vyākhyā, svara-vaidikyoḥ Jayakr̥ṣṇak r̥tā Subodhinī. Vāsudevaśarmaṇā ṭippaṇyādibhiḥ pariṣk r̥tā saṁśodhitā ca.] New Delhi: Meharcand Lachhmandass Publications.

  • Patanjal, D. P. (1963). A critical study of R̥gveda (1.137-163), particularly from the point of view of Pāṇinian grammar. New Delhi: Patañjal Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renou, L. (1960). La théorie des temps du verbe d’après les grammariens sanskrits. Journal Asiatique, 248, 305–337. Paris. [Reprint: In Staal 1972: 500-25.].

    Google Scholar 

  • Śarma, I. (1994). siddhāntakaumudī vaidikī-prakriyā: eka samīkṣātmaka adhyayana [Pāṇini’s Vedic rules in the Siddhānta Kaumudī]. [Hindi] Delhi: Parimal Publications.

  • Śarmā, R. & Kudāla, Ś. (Eds.). (1937). Patañjali’s Vyākaraṇa Mahābhāṣya: with Kaiyaṭa’s Pradīpa and Nāgeśa’s Uddyota. Vol. 3 (adhyāya 3), Bombay: Nirnaya-Sagar Press.

  • Schmid, W. P. (1960). Zum Problem k r̥ṇoti-karoti. Indogermanische Forschungen, 65(3), 235–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, R. N. (1987, 1990, 1995, 1999, 2001, 2003). The Ashṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. 6 vols. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.

  • Sharma, A., Deshpande, K., & Padhye, D. G. (Eds.). (1969, 1970). Kāśikā: A Commentary on Pāṇini’s Grammar by Vāmana and Jayāditya 2 Parts. Sanskrit Academy Series nos. 17, 20. Hyderabad: Sanskrit Academy, Osmania University.

  • Shastri, D. N. (1974). Vedic conjugational system. In Satyavrat Shastri, et al. (Eds.), Śrī-cārudeva-śāstry-abhinandana-granthaḥ [Charudeva Shastri felicitation volume] (pp. 294–298). Delhi: The Charudeva Shastri Felicitation Volume Committee.

  • Shivaramaiah, B. K. (1969). A note on ‘bahulaṁ chandasi’. Mysore Orientalist, 2, 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thieme, P. (1935). Pāṇini and the Veda: Studies in the early history of linguistic science in India. Allahabad: Globe Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Nooten, B. A. (1967). Pāṇini’s replacement technique and the active finite verb. Language, 43, 883–902. Baltimore: Journal of the Linguistic Society of America.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasu, Ś. C. (1891). The Ashṭādhyāyī of Pāṇini. 2 vols. 1d Allahabad. Reprint: Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980.

  • Varma, S. (1950). The Vedic accent and the interpreters of Pāṇini. Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, 26, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitney, W. D. (1893a). On recent studies in Hindu grammar. American Journal of Philology, 14, 171–197. Reprint: Staal 1972: 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitney, W. D. (1893b). The Veda in Pāṇini. Giornale della Società Asiatica Italiana, 7, 243–254. Rome.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Classics, Brown University, Providence, RI, 02912, USA

    Peter M. Scharf

Authors
  1. Peter M. Scharf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter M. Scharf.

Additional information

A defected version of this paper was published in Indo-Iranian Journal, volume 48, issues 1–2, April 2005, pp. 71–96.

About this article

Cite this article

Scharf, P.M. Pāṇinian accounts of the Vedic subjunctive:. Indo-Iran J 51, 1–21 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10783-008-9087-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10783-008-9087-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation