Shringaraprakasha 4.p1.62

4.p1.62

yathā--sa ca tvaṃ ca pacathaḥ, tvaṃ cāhaṃ ca pacāvaḥ, sa ca tvaṃ cāhaṃ ca pacāma iti | yugapadvacanatā caikaśeṣasya dvandvaḥ samānārthatvāñca arthaviṣayaiva gṛhyate ; na cārthaviṣayā | tena --- ahaṃ vā kumbhakarṇo vā tvaṃ vā rākṣasapuṅgavaṃ | indrajidvā nikumbho vā vaheyurbhārabhīdṛśam | śeṣe prathama eva bhavati, tvamahamanyo vā gacchatviti || evaṃ tarhi cārthe yugapadvacanatāyāmabāvāt vaheyuriti bahuvacanaṃ na prāpnoti | naivam ; vārtheṣu kkacidyugapadvacanatā dṛśyate | yathā--dvau vā trayo vā dvitrā iti āha ca mahābhāṣyakāraḥ, dvau prayukte trayo vati gamyate, trayo vetyukte dvau veti gamyate | sauṣā pañcādhiṣṭhānavāk | tatra yuktaṃ bahuvacanaṃ sāmānyāśrayo vā bahuvacanam ; yathā nā---kita bhavataḥ putrāḥ, kati te bhāryā iti bahutvaṃ saṃpadyate yasminnatasminyuṣmadāśrayā | pravṛttiḥ puruṣāsyāsti prakṛte ssā vidhīyate || 4.95. yathā atvantaṃ saṃpadyate tvadbhāvati, ayūyaṃ yūyaṃ saṃpadyante yuṣmādbhavantīti, upalakṣaṇaṃ caitat | prakṛtivikṛtyāśrayapuruṇasaṃpradhāraṇāyaṃ prakṛtyāśraya eva puruṣo bhavati, na vikṛtyāśraya iti | tena anahamahaṃ saṃpadyate madbhavati, avayaṃ vayaṃ saṃpadyante asmadbhāvanti, asassa saṃpadyate tadbhavati, anahamahaṃ saṃpadyate madbhavasītyādyapi siddhaṃ bhavati | kā punaratropapattiḥ ? abhūtatadbhāve prakṛtivikṛtyoḥ kartṛtvavivakṣāyāṃ kāmacāraḥ | tathāhi ; kkacidvika-teḥ kartṛtvaṃ vivakṣyate | yathā--mūtrāya saṃpadyate yāvāguḥ, yathā ca suvarṇapiṇḍaḥ punaraparayā ākṛtyā saṃpṛktaḥ khadirāṅgārasavarṇe kuṇḍale bhavati iti | tathāhi ;

As in: 'He and you cook' [pacathaḥ, dual], 'You and I cook' [pacāvaḥ, dual], 'He and you and I cook' [pacāmaḥ, plural]. And simultaneous expression, because single-remainder and dvandva compounds possess the same meaning, is understood only as pertaining to meaning; it does not pertain merely to form. Therefore: 'Either I, or Kumbhakarṇa, or you, O bull among Rākṣasas, / or Indrajit, or Nikumbha, would carry such a burden'—in the remainder, only the first person occurs, as in: 'Let you, me, or another go.' If so, then because there is no simultaneous expression in the sense of the particle 'vā', the plural in 'vaheyuḥ' would not obtain. This is not so; simultaneous expression is sometimes observed in disjunctive senses, as in: 'Two or three, dvitrāḥ.' And the author of the Mahābhāṣya says: 'When "two" is used, "or three" is understood; when "three" is used, "or two" is understood. Such is speech that rests upon five.' Therefore, a plural is suitable, or the plural is based on a generic notion; as in: 'How many are your sons? How many are your wives?' 'When multiplicity comes into being with respect to that which is not that [second person], an operation based on yuṣmad belongs to the grammatical person; it is prescribed with reference to the base.' 4.95. As in: 'Not being you, he becomes you [tvadbhavati]; not being you, they become you [yuṣmadbhavanti].' And this is illustrative. When deliberating between the grammatical person based on the base and that based on the modification, the grammatical person is based solely on the base, not on the modification. By this, expressions such as 'not being I, he becomes I [madbhavati]', 'not being we, they become we [asmadbhavanti]', 'not being that, it becomes that [tadbhavati]', and 'not being I, you become I [madbhavasi]' are also established. What, then, is the justification here? In the expression of becoming what one was not, when intending agency in either the base or the modification, there is free choice. For instance, in some cases agency of the modification is intended, as in: 'The gruel turns into urine' [mūtrāya saṃpadyate yāvāguḥ], and 'The lump of gold, united with another shape, becomes two earrings having the color of glowing khadira embers.' For so it is said: