Praudhamanorama 60_368

60_368

When the capacity pertaining to the principal is expressed by an affix,
then [the capacity] in the subordinate, even though unexpressed, is understood like that.'
Precisely for this reason, in 'paktvaudano bhujyate' ('having been cooked, the rice is eaten'), when it is expressed by the affix of bhuj, only the first case ending occurs, because pac is subordinate.
In truth, however, in expressions such as "having cooked, [it] is eaten", the object has a simultaneous verbal connection with both roots pac and bhuj; but the connection is verbal with one, and semantic with the other. And in that case, the first and second case endings are strictly fixed. For instance: "having cooked, the rice is eaten" (paktvā bhujyate odanaḥ)—cooked what? By implication: the rice (odanam). But when it is used as "having cooked the rice, [it] is eaten" (odanaṃ paktvā bhujyate), then at "is eaten" (bhujyate) it is understood from the sense that it is the rice (odanaḥ). And thus, depending on a difference in speaker's intention, both "Hari can be worshipped" (pūjayituṃ śakyate hariḥ) and "[one] can worship Hari" (pūjayituṃ śakyate harim) are correct.