The Theory of Nipatas (Particles) in Yaska's Nirukta.

• Author: Klein, Jared S.
• Position: Book Review

By ASHOK AKLUJKAR. Post-graduate and Research Department series no. 42. Pandit Shripad Shastri Deodhar Memorial Lectures Sixth Series. Pane: BHANDARKAR ORIENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, 1999. Pp. iv + 107.

Yaska's discussion of particles in the Nirukta is the most extensive treatment of these forms in the older Sanskrit grammatical tradition. But exactly what Yaska is trying to say has been matter of debate over the centuries. The main aspects of the controversy are the issues of how many categories of particle Yaska intended to posit, the meanings of the descriptive term employed to characterize some of these categories, the apparent misfit between the category descriptions and some of the particles listed under them, and the order of presentation of the particles, Additional questions surround the nature of Yaska's list which is far from exhaustive, and the origin of the very term nipata used to characterize the entire class in question. In this monograph, Aklujkar tackles all of these issues, among others While revealing himself to be conversant with the entire history of scholarship on the Nirukta, from Saunaka to Durga to Skanda-Mahesvara onward, Aklujkar seems to take as a point of departure two recent studies of Western scholars, Bronkhorst (1979) and Falk (1982), both of which introduce rather bold analytical moves and thereby diverge significantly from traditional interpretations. Aklujkar's study, on the other hand, remains vet. much within a traditional Indian framework.

The problems begin with the very first words of Yaska's discussion:

atha nipata uccavacesv arthesu nipatanti. apy upamarthe. api karmopasamgraharthe. api padapuranah (Nirukta 1.4) How many categories is Yaska positing here? Tradition say three (api A api B api C), but Bronkhorst says four (A api B api C api D). The additional category, according to him, is uccavacesv arthesu 'in various meanings'. Although I take it that Bronkhorst's parsing of the conjoined structure is admissible on purely linguistic grounds, it leads to a reading that I find un likely, because it places an elsewhere condition in first position, a procedure at odds with what one expects to find in a descriptive tradition as sophisticated as that of Classical India. (1) Although he does not mention this objection. Aklujkar, too, rejects Bronkhorst's analysis and in the process produces one of the most elegant exegeses in his study. He understands uccavaca-, the source of which is the Rigvedic collocation uc cava ca seen, for example, at RV VIII.19.23b vasim agnir bharata uc cava ca "Agni waves his axe up and down," in the literal meaning 'up and down', hence, with only a minor metaphorical extension, 'salient and latent/subtle'. Regarding the paronomasia nipatah ... nipatanti, Aklujkar rejects Falk's translation "panicles do occur irregularly" arguing that a sense such as "particles...