bhar tṛhari a very distinguished Grammarian who lived in the seventh century A. D. He was a senior contemporary of the authors of the Kasika, who have mentioned his famous work viz. The Vakyapadiya in the Kasika. शब्दार्थसंबन्धोयं प्रकरणम् | वाक्यपदीयम् confer, compare on P. IV.3.88. His Vyakarana work "the Vakyapadiya" has occupied a very prominent position in Grammatical Literature. The work is divided into three sections known by the name 'Kanda' and it has discussed so thoroughly the problem of the relation of word to its sense that subsequent grammarians have looked upon his view as an authority. The work is well-known for expounding also the Philosophy of Grammar. His another work " the Mahabhasya-Dipika " is a scholarly commentary on Patanjali's Mahabhasya. The Commentary is not published as yet, and its solitary manuscript is very carelessly written. Nothing is known about the birth-place or nationality of Bhartrhari. It is also doubtful whether he was the same person as king Bhartrhari who wrote the 'Satakatraya'. Kāśikā of Jayāditya and Vāmana. anukramaṇa enumeration (in the right order as.opposed to व्युत्क्रम ); e. g. अथ किमर्थमुत्तरत्र एवमादि अनुक्रमणं क्रियते on II.1.58; also on IV. 2.70; verbal forms of the root क्रम् with अनु occur in this sense very frequently; Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali on the Sūtras of Pāṇini (Dr. Kielhorn's edition ). यदित ऊर्ध्वं अनुक्रमिष्यामः; so also the exempli gratia, for example अनुक्रान्तं occurs frequently in the same sense. अनुतन्त्र past passive participle. that which follows Tantra literally Śāstra which means the original rules of a Śāstra; technical term for Vartika used by Bhartṛhari; id est, that is सूत्राणां सानुतन्त्राणां भाष्याणां च प्रणेतृभिः Vāk. Pad. I.23, where the word अनुतन्त्र is explained as Vārtika by the commentator. confer, compare artha (1) signification,conveyed sense or object. The sense is sometimes looked upon as a determinant of the foot of a verse: literally प्रायोर्थो वृत्तमित्येते पादज्ञानस्य हेतवः confer, compare XVII 16. It is generally looked upon as the determinant of a word (पद). A unit or element of a word which is possessed of an independent sense is looked upon as a Pada in the old Grammar treatises; Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya by Śaunaka ( Sanskrit Sāhityapariṣad Edition, Calcutta.) अर्थः पदमिति ऐन्द्रे; confer, compare also अर्थः पदम् confer, compare III.2, explained by उव्वट as अर्थाभिधायि पदम् । पद्यते गम्यते ज्ञायतेSर्थोनेनेति पदम् । There is no difference of opinion regarding the fact that, out of the four standard kinds of words नाम, आख्यात, उपसर्ग and निपात, the first two kinds नाम and अाख्यात do possess an independent sense of their own. Regarding possession of sense and the manner in which the sense is conveyed, by the other two viz. the Upasargas (prepositions) and Nipātas (particles) there is a striking difference of opinion among scholars of grammar. Although Pāṇini has given the actual designation पद to words ending with either the case or the conjugational affixes, he has looked upon the different units or elements of a Pada such as the base, the affix, the augment and the like as possessed of individually separate senses. There is practically nothing in Pāṇini's sūtras to prove that Nipātas and Upasargas do not possess an independent sense. Re: Nipātas, the rule चादयोऽसत्वे, which means that च and other indeclinables are called Nipātas when they do not mean सत्त्व, presents a riddle as to the meaning which च and the like should convey if they do not mean सत्त्व or द्रव्य Vājasaneyi Prātiśākhya. a substance. The Nipātas cannot mean भाव or verbal activity and if they do not mean सत्व or द्रव्य, too, they will have to be called अनर्थक (absolutely meaningless) and in that case they would not be termed Prātipadika, and no caseaffix would be applied to them. To avoid this difficulty, the Vārtikakāra had to make an effort and he wrote a Vārtika निपातस्य अनर्थकस्य प्रातिपदिकत्वम् । P. I.2.45 Vār. 12. As a matter of fact the Nipātas च, वा and others do possess a sense as shown by their presence and absence (अन्वय and व्यतिरेक). The sense, however, is conveyed rather in a different manner as the word समूह, or समुदाय, which is the meaning conveyed by च in रामः कृष्णश्च, cannot be substituted for च as its Synonym in the sentence राम: कुष्णश्च. Looking to the different ways in which their sense is conveyed by nouns and verbs on the one hand, and by affixes, prepositions and indeclinables on the other hand, Bhartṛhari, possibly following Yāska and Vyāḍi, has developed the theory of द्योतकत्व as contrasted with वाचकत्व and laid down the dictum that indeclinables, affixes and prepositions (उपसर्गs) do not directly convey any specific sense as their own, but they are mere signs to show some specific property or excellence of the sense conveyed by the word to which they are attached; id est, that is also the statement 'न निर्बद्धा उपसर्गा अर्थान्निराहुरिति शाकटायनः नामाख्यातयोस्तु कर्मोपसंयेगद्योतका भवन्ति । Nir 1.3. The Grammarians, just like the rhetoricians have stated hat the connection between words and their senses is a permanent one ( नित्य ), the only difference in their views being that the rhetoricians state that words are related; no doubt permanently, to their sense by means of संकेत or convention which solely depends on the will of God, while the Grammarians say that the expression of sense is only a natural function of words; confer, compare 'अभिधानं पुनः स्वाभाविकम्' Vārttika No.33. on P. I.2.64. For द्योतकत्व see Vākyapadīya of Bhartṛhari II. 165-206. confer, compare upasarga preposition, prefix. The word उसपर्ग originally meant only 'a prefixed word': सोपसर्गेषु नामसु confer, compare XVI. 38. The word became technically applied by ancient Sanskrit Gratmmarians to the words प्र, परा, अप, सम् Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya by Śaunaka ( Sanskrit Sāhityapariṣad Edition, Calcutta.) which are always used along with a verb or a verbal derivative or a noun showing a verbal activity; et cetera, and others उपसर्गाः क्रियायोगे P. I. 4.59. 'These prefixes are necessariiy compounded with the following word unless the latter is a verbal form; confer, compare कुगतिप्रादयः P.II. 2.18. Although they are not compounded with a verbal form, these prepositions are used in juxtaposition with it; sometimes they are found detached from the verbal form even with the intervention of one word or more. The prefixes are instrumental in changing the meaning of the root. Some scholars like Śākaṭāyana hold the view that separated from the roots, prefixes do not express any specific sense as ordinary words express, while scholars like Gārgya hold the view that prefixes do express a sense e. g. प्र means beginning or प्रारम्भ; confer, compare न निर्बद्धा उपसर्गा अर्थान्निराहुरिति शाकटायनः । नामाख्यातयोस्तु कर्मोपसंयोगद्योतका भवन्ति । उच्चावचाः पदार्था भवन्तीति गार्ग्यः । तद्य एषु पदार्थः प्राहुरिमं तं नामाख्यातयोरर्थविकरणम् confer, compare I. 8. It is doubtful, however, which view Pāṇini himself held. In his Ātmanepada topic, he has mentioned some specific roots as possessing some specific senses when preceded by some specific prefixes (see P. I. 3.20, 24, 25, 40, 4l, 46, 52, 56, Nirukta of Yāska. ), which implies possibly that roots themselves possess various senses, while prefixes are simply instrumental in indicating or showing them. On the other hand, in the topic of the Karmapravacanīyas,the same words प्र, परा et cetera, and others which, however, are not termed Upasargas for the time being, although they are called Nipātas, are actually assigned some specific senses by Pāṇini. The Vārttikakāra has defined उपसर्ग as क्रियाविशेषक उपसर्गः P. I. 3.I. Vārt 7, leaving it doubtful whether the उपसर्ग or prefix possesses an independent sense which modifies the sense of the root, or without possessing any independent sense, it shows only the modified sense of the root which also is possessed by the root. Bhartṛhari, Kaiyaṭa and their followers including Nāgeśa have emphatically given the view that not only prefixes but Nipātas, which include प्र, परा and others as Upasargas as well as Karmapravacanīyas, do not denote any sense, but they indicate it; they are in fact द्योतक and not वाचक. For details see et cetera, and others I. 3, Vākyapadīya II. 190, Mahābhāṣya on I. 3.1. Nirukta of Yāska. 7 and Vārttika (on the Sūtra of Pāṇini). and Kaiyaṭa's Mahābhāṣyapradīpa. thereon. The Ṛk Prātiśākhya has discussed the question in XII. 6-9 where, as explained by the commentator, it is stated that prefixes express a sense along with roots or nouns to which they are attach Mahābhāṣya-Pradīpoddyota by Nāgeśa. It is not clear whether they convey the sense by denotation or indication, the words वाचक in stanza 6 and विशेषकृत् in stanza 8 being in favour of the former and the latter views respectively; cf उपसर्गा विंशतिरर्थवाचकाः सहेतराभ्यामितरे निपाताः; क्रियावाचकभाख्यातमुपसर्गो विशेषकृत्, सत्त्वाभिधायकं नाम निपातः पादपूरणः edition XII. st. 6 and 8. For the list of upasargas see Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya by Śaunaka ( Sanskrit Sāhityapariṣad Edition, Calcutta.) XII. 6, Ṛgvedaprātiśākhya by Śaunaka ( Sanskrit Sāhityapariṣad Edition, Calcutta.) I. 15, Taittirīya Prātiśākhya. VI.24, and S. K. on P. I.4.60. Vājasaneyi Prātiśākhya. koṇḍabhaṭṭa a reputed grammarian who wrote an extensive explanatory gloss by name Vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇa on the Vaiyākaraṇasiddhāntakārikā of Bhaṭṭoji Dīkṣita. Another work Vaiyākaraṇabhūṣaṇasāra. which is in a way an abridgment of the Bhūṣaṇa, was also written by him. Koṇḍabhaṭṭa lived in the beginning of the l7th century. He was the son of Raṅgojī and nephew of Bhaṭṭojī Dīkṣita. He was one of the few writers on the Arthavicāra in the Vyākaraṇaśāstra and his Bhūṣaṇasāra ranks next to the Vākyapadīya of Bhartṛhari. Besides the Bhūṣaṇa and Bhūṣaṇasāra, Koṇḍabhaṭṭa wrote two independent works viz. Vaiyākaraṇsiddhāntadīpika and Sphoṭavāda.