Sanskrit Grammar (Whitney)/Chapter XIII
951 a. Those verbal adjectives, or participles, which are made from tense-stems, and so constitute a part of the various tense-systems, have been already treated. It remains to describe certain others, which, being made directly from the root itself, belong to the verbal system as a whole, and not to any particular part of it.
b. The infinitive (with a few sporadic exceptions in the older language) also comes in all cases from the root directly, and not from any of the derived tense-stems.
c. The same is true of the so-called gerunds, or indeclinable participles.
952. By accented suffix त tá — or, in a comparatively small number of verbs, न ná — is formed a verbal adjective which, when coming from transitive verbs, qualifies anything as having endured the action expressed by the verb: thus, दत्त dattá given; उक्त uktá spoken. Hence it is usually called the passive participle; or, to distinguish it from the participle belonging to the passive present-system (771), the past passive participle.
a. When made from an intransitive or neuter verb, the same participle, as in other languages, has no passive but only an indefinite past sense: thus, गत gatá gone; भूत bhūtá been; पतित patitá fallen.
953. In general, this participle is made by adding त tá to the bare verbal root, with observation of the ordinary rules of euphonic combination.a. Some roots, however, require the prefixion of the auxiliary vowel i to the suffix. For these, and for the verbs that add ná instead of tá, see below, 956, 957.
b. As to the accent when the root is preceded by a preposition, see 1085 a.
954. The root before त tá has usually its weakest form, if there is anywhere in the verbal system a distinction of weak and strong forms. Thus:
a. A penultimate nasal is not seldom dropped: examples are aktá (√añj), baddhá (√bandh), çrabdha (√çrambh), daṣṭá (√daṅç), srasta (√sraṅs), bāḍha (√baṅh).
b. Roots which are abbreviated in the weak forms of the perfect (794) suffer the same abbreviation here: examples are uktá (√vac), uṣṭá (√vas shine), uptá (√vap: also vapta), ūḍhá (√vah), suptá (√svap), iṣṭá (√yaj), viddhá (√vyadh); — and, by a similar procedure, √prach (or praç) makes pṛṣṭá, √bhraṅç makes bhṛṣṭa (beside the regular bhraṣṭá), and √çra boil makes çṛṭá (beside çrātá).
c. Final ā is weakened to ī in gītá (√gā sing), dhītá (√dhā suck), pītá (√pā drink), sphīta; and jītá, vītá, çītá are made from the roots jyā, vyā, çyā, (or jī etc.); — and further to i in chitá (beside chātá), dita (√dā divide and dā bind), drita (? √drā sleep), hitá (√dhā put: with h for dh; but dhita also occurs in V.), mitá (√mā measure), çitá (also çāta), sitá, sthitá.
d. A final m is lost after a in gatá, natá, yatá, ratá (from √gam etc.); and a final n in kṣata, tatá, matá, hatá. As to the other roots in am and an taking ta, see 955 a, b.
e. More isolated cases are -ūta (RV.: √av), utá or ūta (√vā weave), çiṣṭá (also çāsta: √çās), mūrtá (referred to √mūrch). As to -gdha and jagdhá, see 233 f.
f. On the other hand, √svad makes svāttá.
955. Of more irregular character are the following:
a. A number of roots ending in am retain the nasal, and lengthen the radical vowel (as also in some others of their verbal forms): thus, kāṁta, krāṁtá, klāṁtá, kṣāṁta, cāṁta, tāṁtá, dāṁtá, bhrāṁta, vāṁtá, çāṁtá (√çam be quiet), çrāṁtá (from √kam etc.); and one in an, dhvan sound, makes dhvāntá.
b. A few roots in an make their participle from another root-form in ā: thus, khātá, jātá, -vāta, sātá; dham has both dhamitá and dhmātá.
c. Certain roots in īv take their yū-form (765 a): thus, dyūtá (√dīv play), ṣṭhyūta, syūtá; but √mīv makes -mūta.d. From roots in changeable ṛ (generally taking na: 957 b) are made also pūrtá (√pṛ fill: beside pṛta), çīrta and çūrtá (√çṛ crush); and çīrta is further made from √çrī mix.
e. Double forms are mugdhá and mūḍha, sāḍhá and soḍha, dhūrta and dhruta, hvṛta and hrutá.
f. The root dā give makes dattá (from the secondary root-form dad; but dāta also in V.). But the anomalously contracted form -tta (as if for dāta, with the radical vowel lost) is also frequent in composition, especially with prepositions: thus, ā́tta, ánutta, párītta, prátta, prátītta; rarely with other elements, as devátta, punartta, marútta (?). And the same abbreviated form comes from √dā divide in ávatta.
g. The roots making participles in both ta and ita, or ta and na, or in all three, will be noted in the next two paragraphs.
956. The suffix with इ i, or in the form इत itá, used especially with roots having finals that are only with difficulty, if at all, combinable with त् t according to the usual analogies of the language, and often with roots of a secondary, derivative, or late character; but also not seldom with original roots.
a. Thus, of roots presenting difficulties of combination: — 1. all that end in two consonants (save those of which one consonant is lost by a weakening process: 964 a, b): e. g. çan̄k, valg, vāñch, lajj, ubj, ceṣṭ, ghūrṇ, katth, nind, jalp, cumb, umbh, khall, pinv, çaṅs (also çastá), rakṣ, hiṅs, garh (in all, over fifty); but takṣ makes taṣṭá; — 2. all that end in linguals (including ṣ after a or ā): e. g. aṭ, truṭ, paṭh, luṭh, īḍ, vruḍ, bhaṇ, kaṣ, bhāṣ; — 3. all that end in surd spirants: e. g. likh, grath, nāth, kuth, riph, guph; — 4. all that end in l: e. g. cal, gil, mīl, lul, khel: — 6. all that end in other persistent semivowels: namely, carv (also cūrṇa), jīv (for the other roots in īv, see 955 c), dhāv run, sev, day, vyay, pūy; — 6. ujh. — This class includes more than half of the whole number that take only ita.
b. Of other roots ending in consonants: — 1. in gutturals, cak, ḍhāuk (çak has both ta and ita); çlāgh; — 2. in palatals, ac (also akná), uc, kuc, khac, yāc, ruc; aj?, kūj, vraj, also tyaj and mṛj in late texts (usually tyaktá and mṛṣṭá); — 3. in dentals, at, pat, çcut, also yat in epos (elsewhere only yattá); krad, khād, gad, cud, nad, mud, mṛd, rad, rud, vad, vid know, hrād; also nud in epos (elsewhere nuttá and nunna); mad has both mattá and maditá (the majority of roots in d take na: 957 d); edh, kṣudh, gadh, dudh, nādh, bādh, spardh; an, in, kvan, dhvan, pan, ran ring, van, stan, svan, and dhvan (also dhvāntá); — 4. in labials, cup, yup, rup, and usually kup (kupta late) and lap (lapta epic), occasionally kṣip, gup, tap, dṛp, vap, çap, while jap has both ta and ita; grabh (gṛbhītá), çubh, skabh, and occasionally lubh, while kṣubh and stabh have both forms; tim, dham, çam labor, stim, and kṣam in epos (also kṣāṁta); — 5. in spirants, aç eat, īç, kāç, kṛç, vāç, çac, while piç has both forms, and mṛç takes ita only late; iṣ send, īṣ, kuṣ, tṛṣ, tviṣ, pruṣ, miṣ, rūṣ, heṣ, hreṣ, also muṣ except late, while dhṛṣ, ruṣ, and hṛṣ show both forms; ās, bhas, bhās, ras, las, vas clothe, has, also as throw occasionally, while kas, gras, yas, vas shine, vas dwell, çās (with çiṣṭá and çāsta), çvas, and hras make both forms; īh, grah (gṛhītá), jah (secondary form of hā), mah, rah, and occasionally ūh remove, while gāh has both forms.
c. Of roots ending in vowels, only çī lie, which makes çayita (with guṇa of root, as elsewhere: 629).
d. In general, a root maintains its full form before ita; but there are a few exceptions: thus, gṛbhītá and gṛhītá (the root being reckoned as grabh and grah: see 729), uditá (also vadita in the later language), uṣita (√vas shine; beside uṣṭá), uṣita (√vas dwell: also sporadically vasita and uṣṭa), ukṣitá (√vaká increase), çṛthitá (√çrath). From √mṛj are made both mṛjita and mārjita (with strengthening as in present and elsewhere: 627), beside mṛṣṭá.
e. Instead of i, long ī is taken in gṛbhītá and gṛhītá.
957. The suffix न ná (always without auxiliary इ i) is taken instead of त tá by a number of roots (about seventy). Thus:
a. Certain roots in ā: thus, kṣā, glā, drā run, drā sleep, (also drita?), mlā (also mlātá), vā blow (also vāta), çyā (also çīná), styā, hā leave (also hīná and hāta), hā go forth; and dā divide makes diná (also dita and -tta). Further, certain roots in i- and u-vowels: thus, kṣi destroy (kṣīṇa; also kṣitá), ḍī, pī, lī cling, vlī, çī or çyā coagulate (beside çyāna and çīta), hrī (beside hrīta); dū burn (also duta), lū, çū; and dīv lament makes dyūna (compare 765).
b. Roots in ṛ, which before the suffix becomes īr or ūr: the forms are, arṇa (late; beside ṛtá), kīrṇa (√kṛ scatter), gīrṇá (√gṛ swallow), jīrṇá and jūrṇá (√jṛ waste away), tīrṇá and tūrṇa (also tūrtá), dīrṇá (√dṛ pierce: also dṛta), pūrṇá (√pṛ fill: also pūrtá and pṛta), mūrṇá (√mṛ crush), çīrṇá (√çṛ crush: also çīrta and çūrtá?), stīrṇá (also stṛta). Of like character with these are īrṇá from √īr, cīrṇa (beside carita) from √car, gūrṇa (beside gūrtá) from √gur, a secondary form of gṛ, and cūrṇa (beside carvita) from √carv, which is also plainly a secondary root.c. A few roots ending in j (which becomes g before the suffix, against the usual rule of internal combination: 216 f): thus, bhagna (√bhañj), bhugna (√bhuj bend), magná (√majj), rugṇá, vigna (beside vikta). Further, two or three ending in c (similarly treated): thus, akná (√ac or añc: also acita and añcita), vṛkná (√vraçc), and apparently -pṛgṇa (RV., once: with doubly irregular change of root-final, from √pṛc). And one root in g, lagna.
d. A considerable number, some of them very common ones, of roots in d (which, against ordinary rule, becomes n before the suffix: 157 b). The forms are: unna (also utta), arṇṇa?, klinna, kṣuṇṇa, kṣviṇṇa, khinna, channa, chinná, chṛṇṇá, tunná, tṛṇṇá, nunna (also nuttá and nudita), panná, bhinná, vinna (√vid find: also vittá), çanna (√çad fall), sanná (also sattá), skanná (√skand), syanná (√syand), svinná, hanna. And ánna food, in spite of its different accent, appears to be a like formation from √ad eat.
958. The native grammarians reckon as participles of this formation a few miscellaneous derivative adjectives, coming from roots which do not make a regular participle: such are kṣāma burnt, kṛçá emaciated, pakvá ripe, phullá expanded, çúṣka dry.
959. From the past passive participle, of whatever formation, is made, by adding the possessive suffix वन्त् vant, a secondary derivative having the meaning and construction of a perfect active participle: for example, तत् कृतवान् tát kṛtávān having done that; taṁ nigīrṇavān having swallowed him down. Its inflection is like that of other derivatives made with this suffix (452 ff.); its feminine ends in वती vatī; its accent remains on the participle.
960. Derivative words of this formation are found in RV., but without anything like a participial value. The AV. has a single example, with participial meaning: açitā́vaty átithāu one's guest having eaten (loc. abs.). In the Brāhmaṇas also it is hardly met with. In the later language, however, it comes to be quite common. And there it is chiefly used predicatively, and oftenest without copula expressed, or with the value of a personal verb-form in a past tense: primarily, and not seldom, signifying immediate past, or having a true "perfect" value; but also (like the old perfect and the old aorist in later use) coming to be freely used for indefinite time, or with the value of the imperfect (779). For example: māṁ na kaçcid dṛṣṭavān no one has seen (or saw) me; sa nakulaṁ vyāpāditavān he destroyed the ichneumon; or, with copula, mahat kṛcchram prāptavaty asi thou hast fallen upon great misery. Although originally and properly made only from transitive verbs (with an object, to which the participle in ta stands in the relation of an objective predicate), it is finally found also from intransitives: thus, cūtena saṁçritavatī (Ç.) has become united with the mango-tree; gatavatī (ib.) she has gone.a. The same participle is also made in the secondary conjugations: e. g. darçitavant having shown, prabodhitavant having awakened.
b. Possessives also in in made from passive participles are sometimes found used in an analogous manner, nearly as perfect active participles: e. g. iṣṭín having sacrificed, vijitino manyamānāḥ (AB.) thinking themselves to have conquered.
961. Certain derivative adjectives (for the most part more or less clearly secondary derivatives) have acquired in the language a value as qualifying something which is to, or which ought to, suffer the action expressed by the root from which they come; and they are allowed to be made from every verb. Hence they are, like more proper participles, sometimes treated as a part of the general verbal system, and called future passive participles, or gerundives (like the Latin forms in ndus, to which they correspond in meaning).
962. The suffixes by which such gerundives are regularly and ordinarily made are three: namely य ya, तव्य tavya, and अनीय anīya.
a. Derivatives in ya having this value are made in all periods of the language, from the earliest down; the other two are of more modern origin, being entirely wanting in the oldest Veda (RV.), and hardly known in the later. Other derivatives of a similar character, which afterward disappear from use, are found in the Veda (966).
963. The suffix ya in its gerundive use has nothing to distinguish it from the same suffix as employed to make adjectives and nouns of other character (see below, 1213). And it exhibits also the same variety in the treatment of the root.
a. The original value of the suffix is ia, and as such it has to be read in the very great majority of its Vedic occurrences. Hence the conversion of e and o to ay and av before it (see below).
b. Thus: 1. Final ā becomes e before the suffix: déya, dhyeya, khyéya, méya (perhaps dā́-ia etc., with euphonic y interposed); but RV. has once -jñāya. — 2. The other vowels either remain unchanged, or have the guṇa or the vṛddhi strengthening; and e usually and o always are treated before the ya as they would be before a vowel: thus, -kṣayya, jáyya, bháyya, lāyya; návya, bhávya, hávya, bhāvyá; vā́rya: and, in the later language, nīya, jeya, dhūya (such cases are wanting earlier). In a few instances, a short vowel adds t before the suffix: thus, itya, mitya, çrútya, stútya, kṛtya (the only Vedic examples). — 3. Medial a remains unchanged or is lengthened: thus, dábhya, vándya, sádya; mā́dya, vā́cya. — 4. Medial i-, u-, and ṛ-vowels are unchanged or have the guṇa-strengthening: thus, ī́ḍya, gúhya, dhṛṣya; dvéṣya, yódhya, márjya.
c. The RV. has about forty examples of this gerundive, and the AV. adds half as many more. Except in bhāviá (once), the accent in RV. is always on the root; AV. has several cases of accent on the i of the suffix (hence written ādyà, āçyà, -vyādhyà, -dharṣyà). According to the grammarians, the accent is on the root or else the ending is circumflexed: always the former, if the ya follow a vowel.
964. a. The suffix tavya is a secondary adjective derivative from the infinitival noun in tu (below, 968), made by adding the suffix ya (properly ía, whence the accent yà), before which the final u, as usual (1203 a), has guṇa-strengthening, and is resolved into av.
b. Hence, as regards both the form taken by the root and the use or omission of an auxiliary vowel i before the tavya, the rules are the same as for the formation of the infinitive (below, 968).
c. No example of this formation is found in RV., and in AV. occur only two, janitavyà and hiṅsitavyà. In the Brāhmaṇa language it begins to be not rare, and is made both from the simple root and from the derived conjugational stems (next chapter); in the classical language it is still more frequent. According to the grammarians, the accent of the word is either circumflex on the final or acute on the penult: thus, kartavyà or kartávya; in the accentuated texts, it is always the former (the accent távya given to certain gerundives in the Petersburg lexicons is an error, growing out of the ambiguous accentuation of ÇB.: 88 c).
965. a. The suffix anīya is in like manner the product of secondary derivation, made by adding the adjective suffix īya (1215) to a nomen actionis formed by the common suffix ana.
b. It follows, then, as regards its mode of formation, the rules for the suffix ana (below, 1150).
c. This derivative also is unknown in RV., and in AV. is found only in upajīvanī́ya and āmantranī́ya (in both of which, moreover, its distinct gerundive value admits of question). In the Brāhmaṇas (where less than a dozen examples of it have been noted), and in the later language, it is less common than the gerundive in tavya. Its accent, as in all the derivatives with the suffix īya, is on the penult: thus, karaṇī́ya.
966. Other formations of kindred value are found in the Veda as follows:
a. Gerundives in tua or tva, apparently made from the infinitival noun in tu with the added suffix a (1209). They are kártua (in two occurrences kártva), -gaṁtva, jántua, jétua, náṁtua, váktua, sótua, snā́tua, hántua, hétua, hótva; and, with auxiliary i (or ī), jánitva, sánitva, bhávītva.
b. Gerundives in enia or enya (compare 1217): they are īkṣeṇía, īḍénia, caréṇia, dṛçénia, -dviṣeṇia, bhūṣéṇya, yudhénia, váreṇia (and bhajenya BhP.); with one example from an apparent aorist-stem, yaṁsénya, and three or four from secondary verb-stems (see below, 1019, 1038, 1068 a).
c. Gerundives in ā́yia (once ā́yya: compare 1218): they are dakṣā́yia, panā́yia, vidā́yia, çravā́yia, hnavāyia; with a few from secondary conjugation-stems (below, 1019, 1038, 1051, 1068a); and stuṣéyia is of close kindred with them.
d. A few adjectives in elima, as pacelima, bhidelima (only these quotable), are reckoned as gerundives by the grammarians.
967. The division-line between participial and ordinary adjectives is less strictly drawn in Sanskrit than in the other Indo-European languages. Thus, adjectives in u, as will be seen later (1178), from secondary conjugational stems, have participial value; and in the Brāhmaṇas (with an example or two in AV.) is found widely and commonly used a participial adjective formed with the suffix uka (1180).
968. The later language has only a single infinitive, which is the accusative case of a verbal noun formed by the suffix तु tu, added to the root usually directly, but often also with aid of the preceding auxiliary vowel इ i. The form of the infinitive ending, therefore, is तुम् tum or इतुम् itum. The root has the guṇa-strengthening, and is accented. Thus, for example, एतुम् étum from √इ i; कर्तुम् kártum from √कृ kṛ; चरितुम् cáritum from √चर् car; भवितुम् bhávitum from √भू bhū.
a. As regards the use or omission of i, the infinitive (as also the gerund in tvā: 991) follows in general the analogy of the passive participle (956). Examples are (with the gerund added) as follows: dagdhá, dágdhum, dagdhvā́ from √dah; bhinná, bhéttum, bhittvā́ from √bhid; matá, mántum, matvā́ from √man; ūḍhá, vóḍhum, ūḍhvā́ from √vah; patitá, pátitum, patitvā́ from √pat; yācitá, yā́citum, yācitvā́ from √yāc; çayitá, çáyitum, çayitvā́ from √çī. But certain exceptions and special cases require notice. Thus:b. Of roots having no quotable participle, infinitive stems in tu are made from ad, sagh; in itu from uñch, ūh consider, kṣap, luṇṭh, lok, svar; and in both from yabh.
c. Of roots making participles of both forms, an infinitive stem in tu only is quotable for kṣip, kṣubh, tap, tyaj, mṛç, lubh, vas shine, çak, stabh; only in itu for gāh, carv, jap, mad, yat, van, çaṅs, çvas; in both for as throw, ūh remove, gup, car, mṛj (mā̆rṣṭu, mārjitu), lap, vas dwell, çap, çās.
d. Also in a number of other cases (besides those already noticed) an infinitive stem is made both with and without i. Thus, in addition to the more regular form, a stem in itu is occasionally met with from roots aç attain, iṣ seek, bandh, bhaj, yaj (ījitum), rudh obstruct, ruh, vṛṣ, sad (sīditum), sah, han, hṛ; and one in tu from roots ās, bhāṣ, vid know. Both forms occur also from certain am-roots, namely nam, yam, ram, and, with ā before tu as in the pple, kram and bhram (kṣam has only kṣaṁtu, against the analogy of kṣāṁta); further, from certain roots in variable ṛ, namely tṛ (tartu, tarī̆tu), vṛ cover (vártu, varī̆tu), and stṛ (stártu, staritu, stárītu) (but from çṛ crush occur only çárītu, çaritu, and from vṛ choose only varītu; while gṛ swallow and pṛ fill make their infinitive from other root-forms, namely giritum, pūritum); further, from a few vowel-roots, namely nī, cyu, sū (sū́tu); and finally from kṛṣ, nṛt, çuc.
e. Against the analogy of the participle, infinitive-stems in itu after a final consonant are made from the roots av, kṣan, khan and jan (the pples coming from khā and jā), guh, jabh, tam, dīv play and dīv lament (both devitu), majj, vṛt, vṛdh, sṛp; and after a final vowel, from roots in ū, namely pū, bhū, sū (also sūtu), and from çri and çvi; as to roots in variable ṛ, see just above, d.
f. As the infinitive is made from the (accented and) strengthened root, so it naturally has, as a rule, the stronger or fuller root-form where a weaker or contracted form is taken by the participle (and gerund in tvā́): e. g. váktu against uktá (and uktvā́), yáṣṭu against iṣṭá (and iṣṭvā́), banddhum against baddhá (and baddhvā́), and so on. Deserving special notice are gātu (√gā sing) against gītá, and dhā́tu (√dhā suck) against dhītá; and so from dā give and hā leave are made only dā́tu and hātu; but dhā put, mā measure, and sthā add to the regular dhātu, mātu, sthātu the late forms -dhitu, -mitu, -sthitu; and sā or si has sātu, sétu, and -situ; vā weave (pple utá) has both vā́tu and ótu; hū or hvā has havītu, hváyitu, and hvātu. The root vyadh makes its only quotable infinitive, veddhum, from its vidh-form; from sañj or saj occur both san̄ktu and saktu. The anomalous epic forms ījitum (√yaj) and sīditum (√sad), were mentioned above. The root grab makes gráhītum.
g. In the later language, the infinitive-stem forms possessive compounds with kāma and manas (especially the former): e. g. svaptukāma having the wish to sleep, yaṣṭukāma desirous of sacrificing, vaktumanas minded to speak.
h. In very rare instances, dative infinitives in tave or tavāi are made from the infinitive stem in the later language (as abundantly in the earlier: 970 b): thus, pratihartave (BhP.). And jīvase (973 a) is once found in MBh. (i. 3. 67 = 732), in a quasi-Vedic hymn to the Açvins.
969. In the Veda and Brāhmaṇa, however, a number of verbal nouns, nomina actionis, in various of their cases, are used in constructions which assimilate them to the infinitive of other languages — although, were it not for these other later and more developed and pronounced infinitives, the constructions in question might pass as ordinary case-constructions of a somewhat peculiar kind.
970. The nouns thus used infinitively are the following:
a. The root-noun, without derivative suffix, is so used in its accusative in am, its dative in e or (from ā-roots) āi, its genitive and ablative in as, and its locative in i.
b. The verbal noun in tu is so used in its accusative in tum, its dative in tave or tavāí, and its ablative and genitive in tos.
Of other nouns only single cases, generally datives, are reckoned as used with infinitive value; thus:
c. From the verbal noun in as, the dative in ase; and also, in an extremely small number of instances, a dative in se (or ṣe), from a noun formed with s simply.
d. From nouns in man and van, datives in mane and vane.
e. From nouns in ti, datives in taye, or (from one or two verbs) in tyāi.
f. From nouns in i, datives in áye.
g. From nouns in dhi and ṣi, datives in dhyāi and ṣyāi.
h. A few infinitives in ṣaṇi are perhaps locatives from nouns in an added to a root increased by s.
i. From a single root, dhṛ, are made infinitively used forms in tári, of which the grammatical character is questionable.
j. Among all these, the forms which have best right to special treatment as infinitives, on account of being of peculiar formation, or from suffixes not found in other uses, or for both reasons, are those in ṣe, ṣaṇi, tari, dhyāi, and tavāi.
k. Except the various cases of the derivative in tu, and of the root-noun, these infinitives are almost wholly unknown outside the Rig-Veda.
l. Other suffixes and forms than those noticed above might be added; for it is impossible to draw any fixed line between the uses classed as infinitive and the ordinary case-uses: thus, prajā́patim praçnám āitām (TS.) they went to ask Prajāpati; víçvaṁ jīvám prasuvántī carā́yāi (RV.) quickening every living being to motion; apáḥ sármāya codáyan (RV.) impelling the waters to flow; çaknuyā́d gráhaṇāya (instead of the usual gráhītum: ÇB.) may be able to apprehend; ā tamanāt (instead of the usual tamitoḥ: S.) until exhaustion. And the so-called infinitives are found coördinated in the same sentence with common nouns, and even with compound nouns: e. g. cáritave... ābhogáya iṣṭáye rāyé (RV.) to go abroad, to enjoy, to seek wealth; ārtatrāṇāya na prahartum anāgasi (Ç.) for the rescue of the distressed, not for hurling at the innocent.
More special rules as to the various formations are as follows:
971. The root-noun used as infinitive has the same form (except that it does not take an added t: 383 f), and the same accent, both when simple and when combined with prepositions, as in its other uses. In the very great majority of instances, it is made from roots ending in a consonant; but also from a few in ā (khyā, dā, dhā, pā?, mā, yā), from two or three in i- and u-vowels (hi, mī, bhū), and from one or two in changeable ṛ, which takes the ir-form (tir, stir).
a. The roots in ā form the accus. in ām, the dat. in āi, the abl. in ās (understanding avasā́ before ā́ as for avasā́s and not avasāí in RV. iii. 53. 20), and the locative in e (only two examples, of which one is perhaps better understood as dative).
972. The infinitive noun in tu is made freely from roots of every form. The root takes the guṇa-strengthening, if capable of it, and often adds the auxiliary vowel i before the suffix (according to the rules already stated, 968). The root is accented, unless the noun be combined with a preposition, in which case the latter has the accent instead: thus, kártum, étave, hántos; but níkartum, níretave, nírhantos.
a. The dative in tavāi is in two respects anomalous: in having the heavy feminine ending āi along with a strengthened u; and in taking a double accent, one on the root or on the prefixed preposition, and the other on the ending āi: thus, étavāí, hántavāí, átyetavāí, ápabhartavāí.
973. a. The infinitive in ase is made in RV. from about twenty-five roots; in AV. and later there have been noted no other examples of it. In near three quarters of the cases, the accent is on the suffix: e. g. ṛñjáse, jīváse, bhiyáse, tujáse; the exceptions are cákṣase; dhā́yase (with y inserted before the suffix: 258); and áyase, bhárase, spárase, hárase (with guṇa-strengthening of the root). Strengthening of the root is also shown by javáse, doháse, bhojáse, çobháse. In puṣyáse is seen, apparently, the present-stem instead of the root.
b. The ending se is extremely rare, being found only in jiṣé and perhaps stuṣé, and one or two still more doubtful cases.
974. Infinitives in mane are made from only five roots: thus, trā́maṇe, dā́mane, dármaṇe, bhármaṇe, and (with different accent) vidmáne. From √dā comes dāváne; turváṇe may come directly from √tṛ, or through the secondary root turv; dhū́rvaṇe is rather from √dhūrv than from √dhvṛ.
975. a. The infinitives in taye are iṣṭáye (√iṣ), pītáye (√pā drink), vītáye, sātáye, and perhaps ūtáye (ūtáye nṝ́n to help his men: (RV.). In tyāi, the only examples noted are ityāí (RV.) and sā́ḍhyāi (MS. AB.).
b. With aye are formed iṣáye, tujáye, dṛçáye, maháye, yudháye, sanáye; and citáye (VS.), gṛhaye (K.).
976. The ending dhyāi is, more than any other, irregular and various in its treatment. It has always an a before it; and in the majority of cases it is accented upon this a, and added to a weak form of root: thus, çucádhyāi, pṛṇádhyāi, dhiyádhyāi, huvádhyāi. But the form of root is the strong one in a few cases: namely, çayádhyāi, stavádhyāi, tarádhyāi, jarádhyāi, mandádhyāi, vandádhyāi. In half-a-dozen forms, again, the root has the accent: namely, kṣáradhyāi, gámadhyāi, yájadhyāi (but once or twice also yajádhyāi), váhadhyāi, sáhadhyāi, bháradhyāi. In a single instance, píbadhyāi, the suffix is added distinctly to a present-stem; and in one, vāvṛdhádhyāi, to a perfect stem. Finally, in a number of instances (ten), this infinitive is made from a causative stem in ay: thus, mādayádhyāi, riṣayádhyāi, etc.
a. This infinitive is by no means rare in RV., being made in thirty-five different forms (with seventy-two occurrences). But it is hardly known outside of the RV.; the AV. has it but once (in a passage found also in RV.); and elsewhere half-a-dozen examples have been noticed, in mantra-passages (one of them TS. falsely reads gámadhye); in the Brāhmaṇa language proper it appears to be entirely wanting.
977. An example or two are met with of an infinitive in ṣyāi: thus, róhiṣyāi (TS.), avyathiṣyāi (K. Kap.; MS. avyáthiṣe; VS. vyathiṣat), and perhaps -dhāsyāi (PGS.).
978. The infinitives in ṣaṇi are: iṣáṇi (?) from √iṣ send, -bhūṣáṇi from √bhū; çūṣáṇi from √çū or çvā; neṣáṇi from √nī; sakṣáṇi from √sah; parṣáṇi from √pṛ, tarīṣáṇi from √tṛ; and gṛṇīṣáṇi and -stṛṇīṣáṇi from √√gṛ and stṛ — the last containing evident present tense-signs (compare the 1st sing. gṛṇīṣé, 894 d).
979. The only infinitive in tari is dhartári (with its compound vidhartári), from √dhṛ.
980. The uses of the so-called infinitives are for the most part closely accordant with those of the corresponding cases from other abstract nouns. Thus:
981. The accusative, which is made only from the root-noun and the noun in tu, is used as object of a verb.
a. Especially, of forms from the root çak be able, and arh be worthy, have the right or the power. Thus, çakéma tvā samídham (RV.) may we accomplish thy kindling; mā́ çakan pratidhā́m íṣum (AV.) may they not be able to fit the arrow to the string; máno vā́ imā́ṁ sadyáḥ páryāptum arhati mánaḥ páribhavitum (TS.) the mind, forsooth, can at once attain and surpass her; kó hy ètásyā́ ’rhati gúhyaṁ nā́ma gráhītum (ÇB.) for who is worthy to take his secret name? In the Veda, the construction with these verbs is only one among others; in the Brāhmaṇa, it becomes the greatly prevalent one (three quarters or more of all the cases).
b. Further, of verbs of motion (next most frequent case): thus, dā́kṣiṇāni hótum eti (TS.) he goes to sacrifice things pertaining to sacrificial gifts; índram pratíram emy ā́yuḥ (RV.) I go to Indra for (i. e. beseech of him) the lengthening out of life; — of √dhṛ persist in, undertake: as, sá idáṁ jātáḥ sárvam evá dágdhuṁ dadhre (ÇB.) he, as soon as born, began to burn this universe; — of verbs meaning desire, hope, notice, know, and the like: as, pā́çān vicṛ́taṁ vettha sárvān (AV.) thou knowest how to loosen all bonds; tásmād agníṁ nā́ ”driyeta párihantum (ÇB.) therefore one should not be careful to smother the fire; — and of others.
982. Of the infinitive datives, the fundamental and usual sense is that expressed by for, in order to, for the purpose of.
Examples are: víçaṁ jīváṁ caráse bodháyantī (RV.) awakening every living creature to motion; tā́n úpa yāta píbadhyāi (RV.) come to drink them; nāí ’tā́ṁ te devā́ adadur áttave (AV.) the gods did not give her to thee for eating; praí ”d yudháye dásyum índraḥ (RV.) Indra went forward to fight the demon; cákṣur no dhehi vikhyāí (RV.) give us sight for looking abroad.
Some peculiar constructions, however, grow out of this use of the infinitive dative. Thus:
a. The noun which is logically the subject or the object of the action expressed by the infinitive is frequently put beside it in the dative (by a construction which is in part a perfectly simple one, but which is stretched beyond its natural boundaries by a kind of attraction): thus, cakāra sū́ryāya pánthām ánvetavā́ u (RV.) he made a track for the sun to follow (made for the sun a track for his following); çíçīte çṛ́n̄ge rákṣobhyo viníkṣe (RV.) he whets his horns to pierce the demons; rudrā́ya dhánur a tanomi brahmadvíṣe çárave hántavā́ u (RV.) I stretch the bow for Rudra, that with his arrow he may slay the brahma-hater; asmábhyaṁ dṛçáye sū́ryāya púnar dātām ásum (RV.) may they grant life again, that we may see the sun.
b. An infinitive with √kṛ make is used nearly in the sense of a causative verb: thus, prā́ ’ndháṁ çroṇáṁ cákṣasa étave kṛthaḥ (RV.) ye make the blind and lame to see and go; agníṁ samídhe cakártha (RV.) thou hast made the fire to be kindled. Of similar character is an occasional construction with another verb: as, yád īm uçmási kártave kárat tát (RV.) what we wish to be done, may he do that; kavī́ṅr icchāmi saṁdṛ́çe (RV.) I desire to see the sages.
c. A dative infinitive is not seldom used as a predicate, sometimes with, but more usually without, a copula expressed: thus, agnír iva ná pratidhṛ́ṣe bhavati (TS.) like fire, he is not to be resisted; mahimā́ te anyéna ná saṁnáçe (VS.) thy greatness is not to be attained by another; nákim índro níkartave ná çakráḥ páriçaktave (RV.) Indra is not to be put down, the mighty one is not to be overpowered.
d. Sometimes an infinitive so used without a copula has quite nearly the value of an imperative: thus, tyā́ me yaçásā... āuçijó huvádhyāi [asti] (RV.) these glorious ones shall the son of Uçij invoke for me; sūktébhir vaḥ... índrā nv àgnī́ ávase huvádhyāi [staḥ] (RV.) with your hymns shall ye call now on Indra and Agni for aid; vandádhyā agníṁ námobhiḥ [asmi] (RV.) let me greet Agni with homage; asmā́kāsaç ca sūráyo víçvā ā́çās tarīṣáṇi (RV.) and let our sacrifices cross all regions; tán nāí ’váṁ kártavāí (MS.) that must not be done so; brahmadvíṣaḥ çárave hántavā́ u (RV.) let the arrow slay the brahma-haters. The infinitives in dhyāi and ṣaṇi (which latter is in all its uses accordant with datives) are those in which the imperative value is most distinctly to be recognized.
e. In the Brāhmaṇas and Sūtras (especially in ÇB.) the dative in tavāi is not seldom used with a verb signifying speak (brū, vac, ah), to express the ordering of anything to be done: thus, tásmād óṣadhīnām evá mū́lāny úcchettavāí brūyāt (ÇB.) therefore let him direct the roots of the plants to be cut up (speak in order to their cutting up: cf. yé vaçā́yā ádānāya vádanti who dissuade from giving the cow: AV.).
983. The ablative infinitive — which, like the accusative, is made only from the root-noun and that in tu — is found especially with the prepositions ā́ until and purā́ before.
a. Thus, ā́ támitoḥ (TS. etc.) until exhaustion; purā́ vācáḥ právaditoḥ (TS.) before utterance of the voice. In the Brāhmaṇa language, this is the well-nigh exclusive construction of the ablative (it occurs also with prāk, arvāk, etc.); in the Veda, the latter is used also after ṛté without, and after several verbs, as trā and pā protect, yu separate, bhī, etc.
b. In a few instances, by an attraction similar to that illustrated above for the dative (982 a), a noun dependent on this infinitive is put in the ablative beside it: thus, purā vāgbhyaḥ sampravaditoḥ (PB.) before the utterance together of the voices; trā́dhvaṁ kartā́d avapádaḥ (RV.) save us from falling down into the pit; purā dakṣiṇābhyo netoḥ (Āpast.) before the gifts are taken away.
984. The genitive infinitive (having the same form as the ablative) is in common use in the Brāhmaṇa language as dependent on īçvará lord, master, employed adjectively in the sense of capable or likely or exposed to.
a. Examples are: tā́ [devátāḥ] īçvarā́ enam pradáhaḥ (TS.) they are likely to burn him up; átha ha vā́ īçvarò ‘gníṁ citvā́ kíṁcid dāuritám ā́pattor ví vā hválitoḥ (ÇB.) so in truth he is liable, after piling the fire, to meet with some mishap or other, or to stagger; içvaraṁ vāi rathantaram udgātuç cakṣuḥ pramathitoḥ (PB.) the rathantara is liable to knock out the eye of the chanter.
b. The dative is used in ÇB. instead of the genitive in a single phrase (īçvarāú jánayitavāí); and, in the later language, sometimes the accusative in turn. In a case or two the masc. sing. nom. īçvaraḥ is used, without regard to the gender or number of the word which it qualifies: thus, tásye ”çvaráḥ prajā́ pā́pīyasī bhávitoḥ (ÇB.) his progeny is liable to deteriorate. And in a very few instances the word īçvara is omitted, and the genitive has the same value without it: thus, dve madhyaṁdinam abhi pratyetoḥ (AB.) two may be added to the noon libation; táto dīkṣitáḥ pāmanó bhávitoḥ (ÇB.) then the consecrated is liable to get the itch.
c. This construction with īçvara, which is the only one for the genitive infinitive in the Brāhmaṇa, is unknown in the Veda, where the genitive is found in a very small number of examples with madhyā́, and with the root īç: thus, madhyā́ kártoḥ (RV.) in the midst of action; ī́çe rāyó dā́toḥ (RV.) he is master of the giving of wealth; ī́çe yótoḥ (RV.) is able to keep away.
985. Unless the infinitives in ṣaṇi and tari are locative in form (their uses are those of datives), the locative infinitive is so rare, and has so little that is peculiar in its use, that it is hardly worth making any account of. An example is uṣáso budhí (RV.) at the awakening of the dawn.
986. In the Veda, the dative infinitive forms are very much more numerous than the accusative (in RV., their occurrences are twelve times as many; in AV., more than three times); and the accusative in tum is rare (only four forms in RV., only eight in AV.). In the Brāhmaṇas, the accusative has risen to much greater comparative frequency (its forms are nearly twice as many as those of the dative); but the ablative-genitive, which is rare in the Veda, has also come to full equality with it. The disappearance in the classical language of all excepting the accusative in tum (but see 968 h) is a matter for no small surprise.
987. The later infinitive in tum is oftenest used in constructions corresponding to those of the earlier accusative: thus, na vāṣpam açakat soḍhurn he could not restrain his tears; taṁ draṣṭum arhasi thou oughtest to see it; prāptum icchanti they desire to obtain; saṁkhyātum ārabdham having begun to count. But also, not infrequently, in those of the other cases. So, especially, of the dative: thus, avasthātuṁ sthānāntaraṁ cintaya devise another place to stay in; tvām anveṣṭum ihā ”gataḥ he has come hither to seek for thee; — but likewise of the genitive: thus, samartho gantum capable of going; saṁdhātum īçvaraḥ able to mend. Even a construction as nominative is not unknown: thus, yuktaṁ tasya mayā samāçvāsayitum bhāryām (MBh.) it is proper for me to comfort his wife; na naptāraṁ svayaṁ nyāyyaṁ çaptum evam (R.) it is not suitable thus to curse one's own grandson; tad vaktuṁ na pāryate (Çatr.) it is not possible to say that.
988. In the later language, as in the earlier, the infinitive in certain connections has what we look upon as a passive value. Thus, kartum ārabdhaḥ begun to be made; çrotuṁ na yujyate it is not fit to be heard (for hearing). This is especially frequent along with the passive forms of √çak: thus, tyaktuṁ na çakyate it cannot be abandoned; çakyāv ihā ”netum they two can be brought hither; na ca vibhūtayaḥ çakyam avāptum ūrjitāḥ nor are mighty successes a thing capable of being attained.
989. The so-called gerund is a stereotyped case (doubtless instrumental) of a verbal noun, used generally as adjunct to the logical subject of a clause, denoting an accompanying or (more often) a preceding action to that signified by the verb of the clause. It has thus the virtual value of an indeclinable participle, present or past, qualifying the actor whose action it describes.
a. Thus, for example: çrutvāi ’va cā ’bruvan and hearing (or having heard) they spoke; tebhyaḥ pratijñāyā ’thāi ’tān paripapraccha having given them his promise, he then questioned them.
990. The gerund is made in the later language by one of the two suffixes त्वा tvā and य ya, the former being used with a simple root, the latter with one that is compounded with a prepositional prefix — or, rarely, with an element of another kind, as adverb or noun.a. To this distribution of uses between the two suffixes there are occasional exceptions. Thus, gerunds in ya from simple roots are not very rare in the epic language (e. g. gṛhya, uṣya [√vas dwell], arcya, īkṣya, cintya, tyajya, lakṣya; also from causatives and denominatives, as vācya, yojya, plāvya), and are not unknown elsewhere (e. g. arcya and īkṣya M., prothya AGS., sthāpya ÇvU.). And gerunds in tvā from compounded roots are met with in considerable numbers from AV. (only pratyarpayitvā́) down: e. g. samīrayitvā́ MS., virocayitvā́ TA., utkṣiptvā U., pratyuktvā E., pratyasitvā S., prahasitvā MBh., saṁdarçayitvā MBh., vimuktvā R., nivedayitvā R., proktvā Pañc., anupītva VBS.: the great majority of them are made from the causative stem.
b. The prefixion of the negative particle, a or an, does not cause the gerund to take the form in ya: thus, akṛtvā, amīrayitvā (but R. has acintya). Of compounds with other than verbal prefixes, RV. has punardā́ya, karṇagṛ́hya, pādagṛ́hya, hastagṛ́hya, araṁkṛ́tya, akkhalīkṛ́tya, mithaspṛ́dhya; AV. has further namaskṛ́tya.
991. The suffix त्वा tvā has the accent. It is usually added directly to the root, hut often also with interposition of the auxiliary vowel इ i — with regard to which, as well as to the form of the root before it, the formation nearly agrees with that of the participle in त ta (952 ff.).
a. Examples of the general accordance of passive participle, infinitive, and gerund in regard to the use of i were given above, 968 a; farther specifications are called for, as follows:
b. The quotable roots in variable ṛ (242) change it to īr: thus, tīrtvā́, stīrtvā́ (also stṛtvā́); and car makes also cīrtvā (like cīrṇa); — roots in ā show in general the same weakening as in the participle; but from dhā put is quotable only dhitvā́, from mā measure mitvā́ and mītvā, from dā give only dattvā́, from chā chāyitvā; — of roots in am, kram and bhram and yam make forms both with and without i (as in the infinitive), but ram has ratvā́ and raṁtvā, and dam and vam make damitvā and vamitvā.
c. The auxiliary vowel is taken by roots gras, muṣ, çap, and çās (çāsitvā) (whose participles have both forms); also by cāy, nṛt (nartitvā), lag, and svaj (against analogy of pple); and çuc makes çocitvā. On the other hand, from ruj (rugṇa) and vraçc (vṛkṇa) come ruktvā́ and vṛṣṭvā́. And both forms are made (as also in infinitive or participle) from car, vas dwell (uṣṭvā, uṣitvā́), nī (nītvā́, nayitvā), and mṛj (mṛṣṭvā́, mārjitvā).
d. While the formation is in general one requiring, like the passive participle (e. g. uptvā, like uptá; uditvā́, like uditá), a weak or weakened root, there are some cases in which it is made from a strong or strengthened root-form. Thus (besides the instances already given: chāyitvā, raṁtvā, çāsitvā, cāyitvā, çocitvā, nayitvā, mārjitvā), we find charditvā (Āpast.), daṅṣṭvā, and spharitvā, and, from a number of roots, a second strong form beside the more regular weak one: namely, an̄ktvā, bhan̄ktvā, bhun̄ktvā, syanttvā (beside aktvā́ etc.); cayitvā, smayitvā, smaritvā (beside citvā́ etc.); roditvā (beside ruditvā), and siñcitvā (beside siktvā). The last shows the influence of the present-stem; as do also mārjitvā (above) and jighritvā (√ghrft). The form ṣṭhutvā (Āpast.) is doubtless a false reading, for ṣṭhyūtvā.
992. The suffix य ya is added directly to the root, which is accented, but has its weak form. A root ending in a short vowel takes त्य tya instead of य ya: thus, जित्य -jítya, स्तुत्य -stútya, कृत्य -kṛ́tya.
a. Roots in variable ṛ (242) change that vowel to īr or ūr: thus, kīrya, gī́rya, tīrya (and tū́rya), dī́rya, pūrya, çī́rya, stī́rya (also stṛtya); — roots in ā have for the most part -āya; but dhā suck makes dhīya, and double forms are found from gā sing (gāya, gī́ya), pā drink (pā́ya, pīya), dā give (dā́ya, dádya), dā divide (dā́ya, ditya), mā measure, exchange (mā́ya, mítya), sā bind (sā́ya, sya); lī cling has lā́ya or līya, as if an ā-verb; and khan and dham make khāya and dhmā́ya, from their ā-forms; — the roots in an and am making their participle in ata (954 d) make the gerund in atya, but also later in anya, amya (e. g. gátya, gamya; hátya, hanya; but tan makes as second form tāya, and from ram only ramya is quotable); — the roots in īv add ya to their īv-form: thus, ṣṭhīvya, sī́vya; — a few roots in i and u add ya to the lengthened vowel besides adding tya: thus, i go (īya, ítya; also ayya), ci gather (cīya, cítya), and plu, yu unite, su, stu (plū́ya, plutya, etc.); while kṣi destroy has only kṣī́ya.
b. This gerund, though accented on the root-syllable, is generally a weakening formation: thus are made, without a strengthening nasal found in some other forms, ácya, ájya, idhya, údya, ubhya, grathya, tácya, daçya, bádhya, bhajya, lípya, lúpya, vlágya, çrabhya, sajya, skábhya, stábhya, syadya, svajya; with weakening of other kinds, gṛ́hya and gṛ́bhya, pṛcchya, úcya, udya, úpya, úṣya (vas dwell), úhya, vidhya, vī́ya, vṛçcya, spṛ́dhya, hū́ya; — but from a number of roots are made both a stronger and a weaker form: thus, manthya and máthya, mārjya and mṛ́jya, rundhya and rúdhya, çaṅsya and çásya, çāsya and çiṣya, skándya and skádya, sráṅsya and srasya; — and only strong forms are found from roots arc, av, cāy, çī (çayya), as well as from certain roots with a constant nasal: e. g. uñch, kamp, nand, lamb, çan̄k; isolated cases are oṣya (√uṣ burn), prothya (also prúthya).
c. Other special cases are úhya and ūhya (√ūh remove), gurya and gū́rya, gúhya and gūhya, rúhya and rūhya, bhramya and bhrāmya, áyya (beside ítya, īya), ghrāya and jighrya; and ūrṇutya (beside vṛ́tya).
993. The older language has the same two gerund formations, having the same distinction, and used in the same way.
a. In RV., however, the final of ya is in the great majority of instances (fully two thirds) long (as if the instrumental ending of a derivative noun in i or ti). In AV., long ā appears only once in a RV. passage.
b. Instead of tvā alone, the Veda has three forms of the suffix, namely tvā́, tvā́ya, and tvī́. Of these three, tvī́ is decidedly the commonest in RV. (thirty-five occurrences, against twenty-one of tvā); but it is unknown in AV., and very rare elsewhere in the older language; tvā́ya is found nine times in RV. (only once outside the tenth Book), twice in AV., and but half-a-dozen times elsewhere (in ÇB., once from a causative stem: spāçayitvā́ya). The historical relation of the three forms is obscure.
c. Two other gerund suffixes, tvānam and tvīnam. are mentioned by the grammarians as of Vedic use, but they have nowhere been found to occur.
994. The use of this gerund, though not changing in its character, becomes much more frequent, and even excessive, in the later language.
a. Thus, in the Nala and Bhagavad-Gītā, which have only one tenth as many verb-forms as RV., there are more than three times as many examples of the gerund as in the latter.
b. In general, the gerund is an adjunct to the subject of a sentence, and expresses an act or condition belonging to the subject: thus, vajreṇa hatvā́ nír apáḥ sasarja (RV.) smiting with his thunderbolt, he poured forth the waters; pītvī́ sómasya vāvṛdhe (RV.) having drunk of the soma, he waxed strong; tē yajñásya rásaṁ dhītvā́ vidúhya yajñáṁ yūpéna yopayitvā́ tirò ‘bhavan (ÇB.) having sucked out the sap of the offering, having milked the offering dry, having blocked it with the sacrificial post, they disappeared; çrutvāi ’va cā ’bruvan (MBh.) and having heard, they said; taṁ ca dūre dṛṣṭvā gardabhī ’yam iti matvā dhāvitaḥ (H.) and having seen him in the distance, thinking 'it is a she-ass', he ran.
c. But if the logical subject, the real agent, is put by the construction of the sentence in a dependent case, it is still qualified by the gerund: thus, stríyaṁ dṛṣṭvā́ya kitaváṁ tatāpa (RV.) it distresses the gambler (i. e. the gambler is distressed) at seeing a woman; táṁ hāi ’naṁ dṛṣṭvā́ bhī́r viveda (ÇB.) fear came upon him (i. e. he was afraid) when he saw him; vidhāya proṣite vṛttim (M.) when he stays away after providing for her support; kiṁ nu me syād idaṁ kṛtvā (MBh.) what, I wonder, would happen to me if I did this; — and especially, when a passive form is given to the sentence, the gerund qualifies the agent in the instrumental case (282 a): thus, tataḥ çabdād abhijñāya sa vyāghreṇa hataḥ (H.) thereupon he was slain by the tiger, who recognized him by his voice; tvayā sa rājā çakuntalām puraskṛtya vaktavyaḥ (Ç.) presenting Çakuntalā, thou must say to the king; haṅsānāṁ vacanaṁ çrutvā yathā me (gen. for instr.) nāiṣadho vṛtaḥ (MBh.) as the Nishadhan was chosen by me on hearing the words of the swans: this construction is extremely common in much of the later Sanskrit.
d. Occasionally, the gerund qualifies an agent, especially an indefinite one, that is unexpressed: thus, tadā ’trāi ’va paktvā khāditavyaḥ (H.) then he shall be eaten [by us] cooking him on the spot; yad anyasya parijñāya punar anyasya dīyate (M.) that, after being promised (lit. when one has promised her) to one, she is given again to another; sucintya co ’ktaṁ suvicārya yat kṛtam (H.) what one says after mature thought, and does after full deliberation. Hence, still more elliptically, after alam: thus, alaṁ vicārya (Ç.) enough of hesitation; tad alaṁ te vanaṁ gatvā (R.) so have done with going to the forest.
e. Other less regular constructions are met with, especially in the older language: thus, in the manner of a participle with man and the like (268 a), as táṁ hiṅsitvè ’va mene (ÇB.) he thought he had hurt him; tā adbhir abhiṣicya nijāsyāi ’vā ’manyata (AB.) having sprinkled them with water, he believed himself to have exhausted them; — in the manner of a participle forming a continuous tense with √i (1075 a), as indram evāi ’tāir ārabhya yanti (AB.) by means of them they keep taking hold of Indra; — as qualifying a subordinate member of the sentence, as puroḍā́çam evá kūrmám bhūtvā́ sárpantam (ÇB.) to the sacrificial cake creeping about, having become a tortoise; ayodhyām . . . saphenām sasvanām bhūtvā jalormim iva (R.) into Ayodhyā, like a surge that had been foamy and roaring; — even absolutely, as ātithyéna vāí devā́ iṣṭvā́ tā́nt samád avindat (ÇB.) when the gods had sacrificed with the guest-offering, strife befel them.
f. As in the two examples before the last, a predicate word with bhūtvā is put in the same case with the subject: thus, further, tád iyám evāì ’tád bhūtvā́ yajati (ÇB.) so having thus become this earth he makes offering; yena vāmanenā ’pi bhūtvā (Vet.) by whom, even when he had become a dwarf. The construction is a rare one.
g. A number of gerunds have their meaning attenuated sometimes to the semblance of a preposition or adverb: such are adhikṛtya making a subject of, i. e. respecting, of; ādāya, upāgṛhya taking, i. e. with; uddiçya pointing toward, i. e. at; āsādya, arriving at, i. e. along, by; ārabhya beginning, i.e. from; sambhūya being with, i. e. with; saṁhatya striking together, i. e. in unison; prasahya using force, i. e. violently; tyaktvā, parityajya, muktvā, vihāya, uddhṛtya, varjayitvā leaving out etc., i. e. excepting, without; and others. Examples are: çakuntalām adhikṛtya bravīmi (Ç.) I am speaking of Çakuntalā; tam uddiçya kṣiptalaguḍaḥ (H.) having thrown the cudgel at him; nimittaṁ kiṁcid āsādya (H.) for some reason or other.
h. The gerund is in the later language sometimes found in composition, as if a noun-stem: e. g. prasahyaharaṇa taking with violence; pretyabhāva existence after death; vibhajyapāṭha separate enunciation; sambhūyagamana going together. It is also often repeated (1260), in a distributive sense: e. g. sá vāí sammṛ́jya-sammṛjya pratápya-pratapya prá yacchati (ÇB.) in each case, after wiping and warming them, he hands them over; gṛhītvā-gṛhītvā (KÇS.) at each taking; unnamyo’nnamya (Pañc.) every time that they arise.
995. The accusative of a derivative nomen actionis in a, used adverbially, assumes sometimes a value and construction so accordant with that of the usual gerund that it cannot well be called by a different name.
a. No example of a peculiar gerundial construction with such a form occurs either in RV. or AV., although a dozen adverbial accusatives are to be classed as representing the formation: thus, abhyākrā́mam, pratán̄kam, praṇódam, nilā́yam, abhiskándam, etc. This gerund is found especially in the Brāhmaṇas and Sūtras, where it is not rare; in the epics it is extremely infrequent; later, also, it occurs very sparingly.
b. A final vowel has vṛddhi-strengthening before the suffix: thus, nāyam, çrāvam, kāram; final ā adds y: thus, khyāyam, yāyam; a medial vowel has guṇa (if capable of it: 240): thus, kṣepam, kroçam, vartam (but īkṣam, pūram); a medial a before a single consonant is lengthened: thus, krāmam, cāram, grāham, svādam (but grantham, lambham). The accent is on the radical syllable. No uncompounded examples are found in the older language, and extremely few in the later.
c. Examples are: kā́maṁ vā́ imā́ny án̄gāni vyatyā́saṁ çete (ÇB.) he lies changing the position of these limbs at pleasure; úttarām-uttarāṁ çā́khāṁ samālámbhaṁ róhet (ÇB.) he would climb, taking hold of a higher and ever a higher limb; aparī́ṣu mahānāgám ivā ’bhisaṁsā́raṁ didṛkṣitā́raḥ (ÇB.) hereafter, running together as it were about a great snake, they will wish to see him; nā́māny āsām etā́ni nāmagrā́ham (ÇB.) with separate naming of these their names; yó viparyā́sam avagū́hati (ÇB.) whoever buries it upside down; bāhūtkṣepaṁ kranditum pravṛttā (Ç.) she proceeded to cry, throwing up her arms (with arm-tossing); navacūtapallavāni darçaṁ-darçam madhukarāṇāṁ kvanitāni çrāvaṁ-çrāvam paribabhrāma (DKC.) he wandered about, constantly seeing the young shoots of the mango, and hearing the humming of the bees. Repeated forms, like those in the last example, are approved in the later language; they do not occur earlier (but instead of them the repeated ordinary gerund: 994 h).