CONCLUSION

This study concentrates on the concept of Krakas accepted by Pini, Candra

and Bhoja. The Kraka system provides the key to Pinian syntax. Krakas
are the relation between a noun and a verb. In the formulation of the structure
of language, Krakas play a vital role.

It accounts to a number of

generalisations particularly concerning the following aspects of Sanskrit

sentence structure.

1.

The relation between the syntax of actives, passives and statives.

2.

The relation between the sentences and nominal.

3.

The linking of cases to meanings.

4.

The grammatical functions associated implicitly with gerunds

and infinitives.

Cndravykaraa and Bhojavykaraa are the first great revised

editions of the Adhyy of Pini. In the concept of Kraka, Bhoja follows
Pini whereas Candra has allocated only cases without defining the Kraka
relations.

Candra's main intention was to simplify the grammar of Pini and he

succeeded in his dream. But in technical perfection he could not surpass
Pini. He could include easily understandable words in the place of some
complicated words used by Pini. But by allocating only cases without the
Kraka relation he suffered a lot in interpretation. More over in simplifying

262

the grammar of Pini, Candra could not express the variety of meanings
given to the cases by Pini. Candra has also omitted some Stras of Pini
without any consideration. Candragomin thoroughly studied the texts of
Pini, Ktyyana and Patajali and he embodied all the suggestions and
corrections of them and sometimes he included the opinions of the Kika
also.
The division of the subject matter into Adhyya and Pda is common to
both. Candra substitutes shorter and easier words for Pini's longer and
difficult words. For instance in the place of synonyms such as ,

+xi, +Sh etc he uses the shortest term . Similarly he

substitutes the following words.

+ to Pini's |ix*
+v to Pini's +{nx*
+v to Pini's +vEh* and many more.
Similarly he abridges the Stras like +lj |l (CV 2/1/93) for Pini's
long construction |i{nElRM{hSxj |l (AS2/3/46). Here
Siddhntakaumud also supports the view of Candra.

By omitting the Y Stras of Pini, Candra has gained brevity in his

Stra. But a notable thing is that in some cases even though Candra has not
defined the technical terms of Pini, he was forced to use them. While

263

talking about Karma he uses two terms +{ and { instead of Karma . But
he does not define these terms which want explanation. In the Stras of
Candra he uses the term Kraka several times without defining them. By
substituting another word in the place of Karma, Candra has saved a lot of
Stras of Pini. In the place of Ei{ii E' (AS 1/2/49), Eh ui
(AS 2/3/2), ilH Sx{i (AS 1/2/50) +Eli S (AS 1/2/49)etc; Candra
has only one Stra G{ ui (CV2/1/43).

So here the Karma is

substituted by +{' which is not defined.

Candra has effectively abridged some Stras of Pini. For eg:- In lieu
of iil' (AS 1/4/85) of Pini, Candra has the Stra l (CV 2/1/57) .
Here Candra becomes more accurate than Pini. Pini employed accusative
case with +x' which has got all the meanings of the instrumental case. But
Candra employed it with +x' which has the meaning of ' only. Actually
the intention of Pini also was the same.

Candra splits nvE SSx ij {i (AS2/3/9) of Pini

into two. i.e. {ivC (CV2/1/60) and %vx (CV2/1/61). As far as
the former Stra of Candra is concerned, Pini had to employ two Stras
i.e. ={%vE S( AS 1/4/87) and nvE SSx ij {i
(AS2/3/9)

For the second Stra of Candra also Pini employed two

Stras nvE SSx ij {i

(AS2/3/9) and +v

264

(AS1/4/97). So in the above case it is safe to say that Candra saved more
Stras than Pini. Candra abridges vI |x& (AS 1/4/39), |iR

& { Ei (AS 1/4/40) MilEh uiSil S]xvx (AS2/3/12)

, ilSS Sxi (AS 2/3/15), C{ {tx S (Va. 1459), =i{ix Y{i

S (Va1460), {{i& (AS 1/4/36) and inl Sil S (Va. 1458) etc. by
his Stra inl' (CV2/1/79).
Candra includes the Vrtikas of Pini under the Strapha. For
example '+nJtx (Va.1109)', 'xx (Va.1109)', 'nix (Va.1105)'

'V{i|ix{Jx (Va.1107)' etc. are partly utilised by Candra to make

his Stra

x xJtnnGxn&' (CV2/1/47). In the place of

+noix{n i S (Va1114)

Candra has the Stra

otiRx (CV2/1/46).
Some usages can be more clearly justified by the Stra of Candra. For
example the usage Skpii

(Nryaya II.9) from Nryaya of

Melputtr Nryaabhaatiri can be easily justified by the Cndrastra @i

ui S' (CV2/1/84). But to justify this by the Pinian system we have to

depend on ii%xj{ oi' in

=i& E vM{n j
1. Nryaya of Meputtr Nryaa Bha, K.P. Narayapisharodi, P.C. Vasudevan Elayath (Eds),
Guruvayur Devaswam, 1980, v. II.9.

265

uibixi ii%xj{ oi' (Va 1444) where the word +xj is not so
clear. Considering the clarity of this Stra, Bhoja also takes the same Stra
of Candra while revising Adhyy.

Also the usage nnk +i can be justified by the Stra

of Candra E{lx%x{ (CV2/1/76) and this usage is not allowed as per the
Pinian system. By saying +x{' in the Stra of Candra we can
understand that when there is intention of { if Gv etc. is followed or not
followed by prefixes, accusative case can be used along with that. Pini by
the Stra Gvp{]& E (AS1/4/38) ordains that in the case of the verbs
'krudh' and 'druh' when preceded by the prepositions, the person against
whom the feeling of anger is expressed and bears malice to is called Karma .

+i nnkx, Gxni nnkx etc. are the additional examples

seen in Cndravykaraa in connection with the Stras

xJtnnGxn&' (CV2/1/47). But for the roots \' and Gxn' there is
no restriction of the accusative case in the Pinian system. But for V{i
there is restriction for Pini and it is not seen in Cndravykaraa.
The variety of meanings expressed by Pini for the sixth case cannot
be found for Candra. Pini's Stras Y%nl Eh (AS2/3/51), +vMln

Eh (AS2/3/52), E\& |iix (AS2/3/53), Vlx SxxV&

266

(AS2/3/54), +Vxi{i S (Va. 1507), + xl& (AS2/3/45),

Vx|hx]Gl{ (AS2/3/46), {h& l& (AS2/3/57),

ninl (AS2/3/58), {M (AS2/3/59), | ni|nx
(AS2/3/61), Ei%l|M E%vEh

(AS2/3/64), EiEh& Ei

(AS2/3/65), =|{i Eh (AS2/3/66), H S ix (AS2/3/67),

+vEhSxS (AS2/3/68), x

Ex`Jlix (AS2/3/69),

Exv& (Va. 1519), u& i (Va 1522), +Exnvh&

(AS2/3/70), Eix Ei (AS2/3/71), etc. are abridged by Candra to one
Stra ` xv (CV 2/1/95). The meanings expressed by Pini to the
sixth case is reduced by Candra to the one meaning of 'relation'. Thus he has
abridged eighteen Stras and three Vrtikas in the Pinian system. By doing
so one more theory of Candra comes to light i.e. (Ii& EEh xi)
Krakas are allotted according to the intention of the speaker.
The intention of Bhoja was to complete the grammar of Pini by
including the Vrtika, Paribha etc. along with the Strapha and he also
tried to inculcate the definitions of Kraka, Vkya etc. which is not defined
anywhere by Pini or Candra. He tried to perfect his grammar by adding the
suggestions and corrections of Patajali and Candrcrya. In the arrangement
of Stras also some difference is found compared to Pini. For eg:- rnS
is the eighty second Stra of Bhoja in the first Pda of the first chapter
whereas for Pini this is the first Stra of his text. But here Pini has a

267

technical reason to make the word r in the beginning. But not following the
same pattern, Bhoja takes the Stra of Pini as it is and says rnS (SKBh
1/1/82), +nR Mh& (SKBh 1/1/81) etc. reversing the order of Y and Y.
This is technical error from the part of Bhoja.

Bhoja begins to explain Krakas by defining Vkya. i.e. +Ji

EEh C (SKBh 1/1/31). Then he defines Kraka as

Gxk EE (SKBh 1/1/32). This not found in the Candra or Pinian
systems of grammar. Bhoja here wanted to present the basic principles
through the Stra. He uses almost the same Stras of Pini to explain the
Krakas except for |nx and +vEh. He explains |nx by the Stra

Eh G |i |nx (SKBh 1/1/56). Here the supplementary

rule G |i %{ |nx (Va 1085) also is added along with the
Stra. EiExiiGv%vEh (SKBh1/1/74) is the Stra of Bhoja to
explain the +vEh and this Stra also differs from Pini. Here without
considering the mtr, Bhoja tries to make the Stra clearer.

In some cases Bhoja tries to make corrections to the Stra of Pini

considering

the

opinion

of

Patajali.

In

the

Stra

Mir|ixlnEEEhh Ei h (AS1/4/52), Patajali in his

Mahbhya adds this explanation on the meaning of the word nE . i.e.
the word nE can be explained in two ways, n G or n

268

E* If we take the former interpretation, the roots i, Gxni and ni

have to be excluded from the rule and the roots , Y with and with ={
must be included. Thus we will get i Y{i ={i nnk* If
we adopt the second interpretation, the roots V{, with + and { with

must be included in the rule, V{i - {i - +i nnk*

But by including i only in the Stra, it can be assumed that Bhoja agrees
with explanation n& G*

That is why he has nG

instead of

nE in his Stra MiYx|ixlnGEEoxh Ei h (SKBh

1/1/42). He also adds the Vrtika oS' (Va 1108) in his above Stra .
Bhoja also tries to abridge many Vrtikas in the Pinian system and make
them into one Stra following the footsteps of Candra.

xJtnnGxn (SKBh 1/1/45) of Bhoja comes in the place of the

Vrtikas xx (Va 1109), +nJtx

(Va 1106), nix (Va 1105)

nExn nGhi Si inx |iv& (AS1/4/52/Va.1) etc.

Instead of this Stra Candra has the Stra x xJtnnGxn&
(CV2/1/57) as stated earlier. Here Bhoja has abridged four Vrtikas into one
Stra like Candra. Bhoja excludes the roots Gxn and

accepting the

explanation n& G for the word nE

Bhoja differs from Pini in the case of some Stras. For example

{{i (SKBh1/1/60) is the Stra of Bhoja in the place of Pini's

269

{{i& (AS1/4/36). But Bhoja by putting also in the Stra makes the
rule optional. In Pinian system when the intention is not <{i but only
there is ijI then {{h {i can be used. The usages like

E < Exi jxi {xi S justify this opinion. But VP says that
along with {i, the rule {{i& is an exception to the rules
employing EY and `*

Helraja, the commentator of VP also

supports this view. According to him the usages {{h {i and {{&

{i are wrong. Here SK says that when there is only <{ii then {{&
{i and when there is <{iii then {{h {i* But Bhoja makes
this optional when there is <{ii (desire). i.e. According to him {{h

{i and {{& {i can be used when there is just desire.

Bhyakra rejects seven Stras from jlx i&' up to &

|&'* There he takes the meanings thus, S i has the meaning

zii, S& ji has the meaning Ihx S xii, {Vi has
the meaning Mx xii*, i has the meaning |k |ivxzii,

xi has the meaning xxx ii, +vi has the meaning ={vz&xi
n Mhi, h& |{\S Vi has the meaning ii%{Gi or xMSUi,
and for |i x{E x& h* Thus according to Patajali in all the
above cases w{%{nx' itself is enough to employ the fifth case. But
see the observation of abdakaustubha in this regard-

270

iii

xkhnvixil]

ki

lEl\SnH|Mh lx%{ Jl{Eh `|M n&, x]

hiii* x {vx]& GxE{ H C&*
+xvxji |ix i xix* B VM{-'
<iniE{h* il S jiEi |* il 'w',
'i&',

'+]&'

<inYxn%{

lE&*

{ikkiY|{i{

iI 'x hxi' <in ` <]i ij{nxY

hii* Bhoja might have thought in the same way stated above and he
retains the above Stras as that of Pini. But Candra considering the opinion
of Patajali rejected the Stras and employs fifth case by +v& {\S (CV
2/1/81). Even though Bhoja considers the opinion of Candra while revising
Adhyy, he does not consider the view of Candra in this regard.

Both Bhoja and Candra omit the head Stras +xi (AS2/3/1).
Patajali also supports the view when Kraka is indicated by the case ending
and Bhoja follows the same line.

In short the Pinian system is perfect technically and Pini showed a

way for the depiction of grammar for the later grammarians. By supplementing
Vrtika, Bhya, Paribha, Dhtupha, Udi etc. his grammar is complete.
Candra wanted to remove the complications in the understanding of the

271

Pinian grammar. So he abridged it and made it easily accessible to the

grammar students. But Bhoja follows the same line of Pini and almost he
uses the same Stras. But he wanted to depict grammar completely by the
Strapha and gives more clarity to the Stras. In some cases he follows
Candra and in the other expresses his own opinion. Even though Candra omits
the terminologies of Pini, and Bhoja uses them, both suffer a lot in the
technical perfection. Both tried to include some usages which came in the
language after Pini or tried to show some usages directly by Stras which
could be justified by the Pinian system in a complicated way.

--------------------