Praudhamanorama p12

p12

Although, being depended upon here, the technical name 'anunāsika' ought properly to be stated first, nevertheless, because its purpose is already accomplished merely by resorting to etymology, as 'following the nose' (nāsikām anugataḥ), it is not introduced here in order to imply that the rule defining the technical name 'anunāsika' has little practical purpose. Why [say] 'in an original enunciation'? [To prevent the marker designation in] 'abbhra ām̐ apaḥ'. Although one could easily say that here, as in 'uñaḥ' and 'ūm̐' (Pāṇini 1.1.17–18), the marker status does not apply by virtue of the rule's specific prescription, still the inclusion of 'original enunciation' (upadeśa), which had to be made anyway for subsequent rules, is made right here for clarity of understanding. Why [say] 'a vowel' (ac)? Lest it apply to the m-sound of the suffix manin. 'That which is declared (pratijñāyate) is a declaration (pratijñā)'; [formed with] the suffix aṅ in the sense of the direct object by the rule 'ātaścopasarge' (Pāṇini 3.3.106). The analytical paraphrase is: 'those whose nasalization is a matter of declaration'. And thus there is no need to resort to the strained interpretation that 'the word pratijñā is used figuratively for that which is known by declaration', because it can be established without figurative extension, just as in phrases like 'the grammar initiated by Pāṇini' (pāṇinyupajñaṃ vyākaraṇam). Although the recitation with nasalization made by the Sūtrakāra is now lost, it is inferred on the strength of the practice of the Vṛttikāra and others that it was originally present in accordance with each operation; this is the purport. [Objection:] Surely saying 'between r and l' is incomplete, because the letter ṭ also stands in between? To this he says: 'among abbreviatory designations' (pratyāhāreṣu). 'They are employed' (vyavahriyante): [a pratyāhāra is that] in which sounds are abbreviated (pratyāhriyante = saṃkṣipyante), by the suffix ghañ in the locative case by variational application (bāhulaka). Even though the mere etymological derivation would over-extend to names like the letter a, still there is conventional etymological meaning (yogarūḍhi); this is the purport. And the older grammarians say that the abbreviatory designations are forty-one. Its meaning is: those formed with the consonants as markers occurring in the fourteen-sūtra list and employed in the Aṣṭādhyāyī are forty-one. Therefore, there is no defect even if suffixes like sup and tiṅ, the abbreviatory designation ra, and the abbreviatory designation cay occurring in the vārttika 'cayo dvitīyāḥ' are additional. As for what they say—that ñam was employed by the Vārttikakāra in 'ñamaṅantāḍḍaḥ' and 'yamir ñamanteṣv aniḍ eka iṣyate'—that is a hasty statement, because the former is an uṇādi-sūtra, and the latter occurs in a kārikā of Vyāghrabhūti; so let that be for now. And this restriction on the number is disregarded because it is not extremely useful.
ūkālo'jjhrasvadīrghaplutaḥ (Pāṇini 1.2.27)