Praudhamanorama 60_358

60_358

[Regarding the gloss] “vacana means number”: Because the usage of the older grammarians is just like that.
In this sūtra, it is well enough said merely: “The nominative case [occurs] in [the sense of] the stem-meaning and gender.” Everything else can be discarded. To explain: when it is said, “in the meaning, the nominative case occurs,” upon the expectancy “in whose meaning?”, it is obtained precisely that it belongs to that after which su and the other endings are prescribed. And su and the other endings are prescribed after a nominal stem and after that which is accompanied by a feminine affix. And having that as its meaning is simply having its appearance invariably from that. And thus in mṛḍānī and the like, since [meanings such as] connection with a husband, greatness, etc., also invariably appear from that which ends in ṅī, the nominative case is accomplished, which is another advantage. Under the rule as phrased, however, it would not occur.
If, however, the word artha refers to the object of expressive function, and expressive function is primary power and secondary indication, while the metaphorical is included within secondary indication or may be separate, [and] the nominal stem meaning consists of the triad [of universal, individual, and gender]—then let even the word liṅga not be [in the sūtra]. Even though the examples to be explained are diverse, there is no harm, because the restrictive element has been abandoned. And thus the core is simply: “The nominative case occurs in [the stem] meaning.” Even droṇo vrīhiḥ is accomplished by metaphorical transfer of the word droṇa to that which is measured by it, just like gaur vāhīkaḥ. Even [the examples] ekaḥ, dvau, etc., are accomplished merely from the prohibition “a bare base must not be used,” because the use of a merely reiterative [element] is more appropriate than the use of something whose meaning is unconnected.
Likewise, the mention of mātra is also useless, because by the implicit clue of [the rule] “sambodhane ca,” the nominative case does not apply when there is an addition such as the direct object.