Praudhamanorama p8

p8

Regarding the word antyam in the rule: the meaning is that, under the analytical paraphrase hali antyam ("the final in hal"), there is a compound formed by splitting of the rule "saptamī" [Pāṇini 2.1.40] or by [the general rule] "sup supā" (Pāṇini 2.1.4). Alternatively, this is a genitive tatpuruṣa [hasya l]. One might argue: let there be just any one of single utterance serving multiple purposes, repetition, or single remainder in the case of hal; and it will be explained as 'the l of h' [hasya l], proximity being the meaning of the genitive. Or rather, let there be no single utterance and the like, but let there be an aggregative dvandva: hal ca l ca [hal-l = hal], and there is elision of the [final] letter l by [the rule for that which is] ending in a conjunct consonant [saṃyogāntasya lopaḥ]. If so argued, it is not so; because in the first [alternative], the compound is far-fetched. For in [examples like] "a Brahmin's blanket" (brāhmaṇakambalaḥ), one does not understand a blanket belonging to someone else situated near a Brahmin; nor from the word citragu does one understand a tree or the like situated near multi-colored cows. For this very reason, there is no compound in [relationships such as] proximity and the like, because of lack of expressive usage (anabhidhāna), as is clear in the source texts. Why say more? Even an uncompounded utterance such as "brāhmaṇasya kambalaḥ" or "citrā gāvo 'sya" is not desired there [in the sense of mere proximity]. In the second [alternative] also, elision of that which ends in a conjunct consonant is hard to attain, because a prohibition is undertaken for yaṇ [i.e., semivowels/liquids including l]. Even in the view that rejects that prohibition, [it is hard to attain] because, drawing down the mention of jhal from "jhalo jhali" (Pāṇini 8.2.26), the elision of jhal [alone] is prescribed. Furthermore, since the comprehension of sentence meaning is impossible without the comprehension of word meaning, when the non-comprehension of the meaning of this rule arises prior to the establishment of the abbreviatory designation hal, this effort [of analysis] is for the purpose of resolving that [difficulty]; and in this condition, when the meaning of the word hal is not yet established, a dvandva itself is difficult to obtain, because simultaneous intention to speak [both referents] is impossible. Therefore, only what was stated previously is proper.
ādirantyena sahetā (Pāṇini 1.1.71).