Jaiminiyanyayamala 42.2.18-3

42.2.18-3

First of all, phonemic divergence is not its definition; for then a phonetic modification, by virtue of being an altered phoneme, would contingently become a musical interjection. In the verse ‘*agna āyāhi*’, having put the phoneme *o* in place of the phoneme *a*, they sing ‘*ognāyī*’. If it is said, ‘an additional phoneme is a musical interjection’, there is over-extension to repetition. In the verse ‘*pibā somam indra mandatu tvā*’, the triad of syllables ‘*datu tvā*’ is repeated thrice at the time of chanting. Therefore, because of over-extension to modification and repetition, there is no definition. If this is urged— / It is not so. Because ‘being a phoneme distinct from the verse while being additional’ is its qualified definition. In ordinary life too, an assemblage of words uttered by a trickster in an assembly, unconnected to the matter at hand and serving merely to waste time, is called a ‘*stobha*’. Therefore, a definition exists.