1.4.6
Mīmāṃsā Sūtra / Adhyāya 1 / 1.4.6
नामधेये गुणश्रुतेः स्याद् विधानमिति चेत्
nāmadheye guṇaśruteḥ syād vidhānam iti cet
The line
If you say that a quality heard in the name would make an injunction, that is the objection.
नेपालीमा
यदि नाममा सुनिएको गुणले विधि बनाउँछ भन्नुहुन्छ भने, त्यो आक्षेप हो।
Where it sits
nāmadheye (नामधेये) is the status given in 1.4.2. The objector uses it as the place where a quality is still heard. iti cet holds the objection for the next line. The vājapeya (वाजपेय) sentence is the case.
Split: nāmadheye (नामधेये) + guṇa-śruteḥ (गुण-श्रुतेः) + syāt (स्यात्) + vidhānam (विधानम्) + iti (इति) + cet (चेत्)
Sanskrit, in depth
The words
| Word | Grammar | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| nāmadheye (नामधेये) | locative singular, neuter | in a name |
| guṇa-śruteḥ (गुण-श्रुतेः) | ablative singular, feminine | because a quality is heard |
| syāt (स्यात्) | third person singular, optative, of the verb as | there would be |
| vidhānam (विधानम्) | nominative singular, neuter | an injunction |
| iti (इति) | indeclinable | thus |
| cet (चेत्) | indeclinable | if |
The phrases
The sentence is: one who desires overlordship should sacrifice with the vājapeya (वाजपेय). One asks whether this is a quality-injunction or a name.
The objector says there is no room for doubt. A quality is heard in the word. What is understood cannot be talked away. So, he says, it is an injunction of that quality.
Sanskrit in this line
guṇaśruteḥ (गुणश्रुतेः) keeps its visarga before syāt (स्यात्). syāt (स्यात्) before vidhānam (विधानम्) is heard as syād (स्याद्). The locative nāmadheye (नामधेये) is the topic, not a claim that the word has already been decided.
Say it back
State the objection: the vājapeya (वाजपेय) sentence hears a quality, so it seems to enjoin that quality.