History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v7.c93.495

v7.c93.495

The basic idea underlying the latter sense of vākyabheda is this. If an act or a substance or a secondary matter has already been the subject of a vidhi and if concerning the act (or substances &c) a number of other matters (actions, substances &c.) are enjoined in one sentence, there would be vākyabheda (i. e there would have to be a separate vidhi for each of the other matters relating to what has already been the subject of a *vidhi*) On the other hand, if an action, substance or a *guṇa* is enjoined for the first time along with several secondary matters in one sentence, there would be no fault of vākyabheda i. e. in a single vākya however long or containing many matters, if there is a single vidhi there is no fault. If, in the passage quoted on p. 1258 above²¹³⁰ 'one desiring prosperity should offer in sacrifice a white animal to Vāyu', one were to hold that first there is to be a *vidhi* about prosperity as the fruit or reward, there would be two vidhis and so the fault of vākyabheda, but if one holds that the vidhi is only concerned with offering a white animal and what follows 'vāyurvai kṣepiṣṭhā......bhūtim gamayati' is merely an arthavāda (praise of the preceding vidhi), there is no vākyabheda. The fault of vākyabheda arises when more vidhis than one are held to occur in the same vākya.²¹³¹