Praudhamanorama 12_254

12_254

On [the text commenting on] *ṛtvigdadhṛk* (Pāṇini 7.1.71): "something" [kiñcit] means: the suffix *kvin* after the root *yaj-* when *ṛtu-* is the co-occurring word (*upapada*); reduplication and end-acute accentuation of *dhṛṣṇo-* (*dhṛṣ-*); after *sṛj-*, *kvin* in the passive/object sense and the augment *am*; [the same] after *diś-* in the passive/object sense; after *snih-* preceded by the prefix *ud-*, *kvin*, elision of the end of the prefix, and retroflexion (*ṣatva*); and after *añc-*, *kvin* when a nominal inflected form (*sup*) is the co-occurring word. On "after *yuj-*": the same applies to *kuñc-* as well, but with the non-occurrence of the elision of *n* being additional. On "in *kana-*": the letter *i* is for ease of pronunciation; this is the meaning.
On "in the proximate": as for what the older grammarians said, namely, "in the third section governed by *dhātoḥ*"—that is incorrect, because since the mention of *dhātu* in the rule for *san* does not continue into the subsequent rules, there are not three governing domains.
On *yujerasamāse* (Pāṇini 7.1.71): on "all [sarvanāmasthāna]": as for what the older grammarians said, namely, "before *suṭ*"—that is incorrect, because only *sarvanāmasthāne* is under discussion, there is no justification for metaphorical extension (*lakṣaṇā*), and it would over-apply to the neuter dual form *yujī*. As for what they say: "in the neuter plural *yuñji* after *śas*, the augment *num* would not occur"—that is incorrect, because the augment *num* can occur by *napuṃsakasya jhalacaḥ* (Pāṇini 7.1.72).
On "elision of *su*": because velarization (*kutva*) is unaccomplished (*asiddha*), first the augment *num* occurs on account of being subsequent; then follows the elision by *halṅyābbhyo...*; this is the meaning.