[310] That is, the ubhayaprápti of ii. 3, 66, is a bahuvríhi agreeing with kṛiti in ii. 3, 65. These points are all discussed at some length in the Commentaries on Páṇini.
[311] These actually occur in the Commentaries to Páṇini, ii. 2, 8; iii. 3, 117, &c.
[312] This takes in all cases of relation, sambandha (i.e., shashṭhí-sambandha).
[313] As in such rules as vi. 2, 139.
[314] These compounds occur in Páṇini's own sútras (i. 4, 30, and i. 4, 55), and would violate his own rule in ii. 2, 15, if we were to interpret the latter without some such saving modification as shashṭhí śeshe.
[315] The very word śabda in śabdánuśásanam implies the Veda, since this is pre-eminently śabda.
[316] Compare Max Müller, Sansk. Liter., p. 113. It is quoted as from the Veda in the Mahábháshya.
[317] In the Calcutta text, p. 138, dele daṇḍa in line 3 after bhavet, and insert it in line 4 after śabdánám.
[318] As in the so-called pada text.
[319] See Ballantyne's Mahábháshya, pp. 12, 64.