Verse 3.1.3

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation of verse 3.1.3:

केषाञ्चित्साहचर्येण जातिः शक्त्युपलक्षणम् ।
खदिरादिष्वशक्तेषु शक्तः प्रतिनिधीयते ॥ ३ ॥

keṣāñcitsāhacaryeṇa jātiḥ śaktyupalakṣaṇam |
khadirādiṣvaśakteṣu śaktaḥ pratinidhīyate || 3 ||

3. According to some, the universal is the means of conveying ‘power’ because of association. If the ‘Acacia catechu’ etc. are powerless (i.e., not being available, are powerless to accomplish the action in question) a substitute having that power is taken.

Commentary

Now a doubt arises: If the universal is the meaning of every word, how can it enter into relation with action which is the meaning of the verb in the sentence? It is only the accessory (sādhana) which can be connected with action and the universal can never be the accessory. No doubt, its substratum can be the accessory; but, after all, it is the universal which is directly conveyed by the word. So, when something having the universal prescribed in a Vedic injunction is not available, we cannot use a substitute, because it would not have the prescribed universal. Thus Vedic injunctions cannot be carried out. This difficulty is removed as follows—

[Read verse 3 above]

[According to the view of some theorists, the universal is the means (upalakṣaṇa) whereby power or capacity is conveyed, because the universal and power reside in the same substratum. Others, on the other hand, think that it is the universal which is primarily conveyed by the word and that, in some cases, it enters into direct relation with action, while, in other cases, it does so through the medium of power. The word keṣāñcit in the verse can also mean: ‘in the case of some words’. Those words which express the accessories denote mainly capacity. In such words, it is the case-endings which stand for power or capacity and as the case-ending cannot be used by itself, the stem must necessarily be used and that expresses the universal which qualifies the capacity conveyed by the case-ending. All this is true where the thing prescribed is available. Where it is not available, power or capacity becomes associated with the nearest universal. The Vedas enjoin actions which must be performed. Particular materials for the performance of these actions are also taught. If any material is not available, the action must still be performed with a substitute.]

The author now points out how, even according to those who hold that the word primarily conveys the universal and not capacity through the universal the use of substitutes can be explained.