Proof — Verse 1.13

अर्थप्रवृत्तितत्त्वानां शब्दा एव निबन्धनम् ।
तत्त्वावबोधः शब्दानां नास्ति व्याकरणादृते ॥ १३ ॥

Words alone are the basis of the realities that govern activity toward objects; and there is no grasp of the reality of words apart from grammar.

Endorsed axioms (each cite is verbatim commentary)

• {"kind": "relation", "name": "nibandhanam", "from": "sabda", "to": "arthapravritattva"}“words are the nibandhana, the ground or fastening, of artha-pravrtti-tattva — the realities underlying our purposive activity toward objects”
• {"kind": "relation", "name": "asraya", "from": "vyakaran", "to": "tattvavabodh"}“the nature of words is not accessible without grammar”
• {"kind": "relation", "name": "linguistic_carving", "from": "sabda", "to": "arthapravritattva"}“we act toward a world already carved by language, and the carving is what our activity answers to”

Denials

• {"kind": "relation", "name": "asraya", "from": "sabda", "to": "tattvavabodh"}“the nature of words is not accessible without grammar”

Rejected readings (refuted by compiled theorems)

• “The realities of activity provide the foundation for words; language is a consequence of objective structures.” — Reverses the priority. The verse insists that words alone (sabda eva) are the nibandhanam of the realities underlying activity, not the reverse.
• “Words can be understood independently of grammar; their essence is directly accessible without linguistic analysis.” — Directly contradicts the second premise. The commentary explicitly states there is no grasp (nasti) of word-essence apart from grammar, making vyakaran the essential support (asraya).
• “The structures governing activity are accessible through multiple independent means: direct cognition (tattvavabodh) can ground understanding of activity-realities without mediation through words.” — Violates the exclusive claim. The commentary insists words alone (sabda eva) rule out any non-linguistic access to the structures of purposive activity. Direct understanding cannot bypass the requirement for linguistic grounding.

Lean module

/- Verse 1.13 — generated from data/contracts/1.13.json. DO NOT EDIT.
   Axiom cites are verbatim commentary quotations, validated by
   tests/test_contracts.py. -/
import VakyaVallari.Adequacy

namespace VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_13

open VakyaVallari

def sabda : Entity := ⟨"śabda", Sorta.linguisticItem⟩
def arthapravritattva : Entity := ⟨"arthapravṛttitattvā", Sorta.absolute⟩
def vyakaran : Entity := ⟨"vyākaraṇa", Sorta.linguisticItem⟩
def tattvavabodh : Entity := ⟨"tattvāvabodhaḥ", Sorta.cognition⟩

def contract : Contract :=
  { axioms := [ Claim.relation "nibandhanam" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent arthapravritattva)
    , Claim.relation "asraya" (Node.ent vyakaran) (Node.ent tattvavabodh)
    , Claim.relation "linguistic_carving" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent arthapravritattva) ]
  , denials := [ Claim.relation "asraya" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent tattvavabodh) ]
  , reported := [] }

def accepted : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.relation "nibandhanam" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent arthapravritattva)
    , Claim.relation "asraya" (Node.ent vyakaran) (Node.ent tattvavabodh) ] }

theorem accepted_adequate : contract.Adequate accepted := by decide

namespace Counterexamples

/- 'The realities of activity provide the foundation for words; language is a consequence of objective structures.'
   Why rejected: Reverses the priority. The verse insists that words alone (sabda eva) are the nibandhanam of the realities underlying activity, not the reverse. -/
def reversed_grounding : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.relation "nibandhanam" (Node.ent arthapravritattva) (Node.ent sabda) ] }
theorem reversed_grounding_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate reversed_grounding := by decide
#guard contract.licenses reversed_grounding = false

/- 'Words can be understood independently of grammar; their essence is directly accessible without linguistic analysis.'
   Why rejected: Directly contradicts the second premise. The commentary explicitly states there is no grasp (nasti) of word-essence apart from grammar, making vyakaran the essential support (asraya). -/
def grammar_optional : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.relation "asraya" (Node.ent sabda) (Node.ent tattvavabodh) ] }
theorem grammar_optional_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate grammar_optional := by decide
#guard contract.contradicts grammar_optional = true

/- 'The structures governing activity are accessible through multiple independent means: direct cognition (tattvavabodh) can ground understanding of activity-realities without mediation through words.'
   Why rejected: Violates the exclusive claim. The commentary insists words alone (sabda eva) rule out any non-linguistic access to the structures of purposive activity. Direct understanding cannot bypass the requirement for linguistic grounding. -/
def plural_access_routes : Reading :=
  { claims := [ Claim.relation "asraya" (Node.ent tattvavabodh) (Node.ent arthapravritattva) ] }
theorem plural_access_routes_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate plural_access_routes := by decide
#guard contract.licenses plural_access_routes = false

end Counterexamples

end VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_13