स्वं रूपमिति कैश्चित्तु व्यक्तिः संज्ञोपदिश्यते ।
जातेः कार्याणि संसृष्टा जातिस्तु प्रतिपद्यते ॥ ६८ ॥
संज्ञिनीं व्यक्तिमिच्छन्ति सूत्रे ग्राह्यामथापरे ।
जातिप्रत्यायिता व्यक्तिः प्रदेशेषूपतिष्ठते ॥ ६९ ॥
(68) But by some, it is the individual that is taught as the name in 'its own form'; the class, being connected, receives the operations of the class. (69) Others hold that it is the individual that is the named, to be grasped in the sutra; the individual, conveyed through the class, presents itself in the particular contexts.
This verse is doxographic: the commentary reports a rival view (pūrvapakṣa) it does not itself endorse. Reported axioms are held separately in the Lean contract (Contract.reported); they license a faithful translation of the report without being asserted as Bhartṛhari's doctrine.
{"kind": "predication", "name": "apparatus_component", "of": "vyakti"}“rule-stated language requires an apparatus of types and tokens”{"kind": "predication", "name": "apparatus_component", "of": "jati"}“rule-stated language requires an apparatus of types and tokens”{"kind": "relation", "name": "samsrsta", "from": "jati", "to": "vyakti"}“the class is samsrsta, connected — riding in on the individual”{"kind": "relation", "name": "jati_pratyayita", "from": "jati", "to": "vyakti"}“conveyed through the class”/- Verse 1.68-69 — generated from data/contracts/1.68-69.json. DO NOT EDIT.
Axiom cites are verbatim commentary quotations, validated by
tests/test_contracts.py. -/
import VakyaVallari.Adequacy
namespace VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_68_69
open VakyaVallari
def vyakti : Entity := ⟨"vyakti", Sorta.manifestation⟩
def jati : Entity := ⟨"jāti", Sorta.power⟩
def contract : Contract :=
{ axioms := [ Claim.predication "apparatus_component" vyakti
, Claim.predication "apparatus_component" jati ]
, denials := []
, reported := [ Claim.relation "samsrsta" (Node.ent jati) (Node.ent vyakti)
, Claim.relation "jati_pratyayita" (Node.ent jati) (Node.ent vyakti) ] }
-- pūrvapakṣa: this contract carries reported (non-endorsed) claims
#guard contract.doxographic = true
def accepted : Reading :=
{ claims := [ Claim.predication "apparatus_component" vyakti
, Claim.predication "apparatus_component" jati
, Claim.relation "samsrsta" (Node.ent jati) (Node.ent vyakti) ] }
theorem accepted_adequate : contract.Adequate accepted := by decide
namespace Counterexamples
/- 'The form-universal (jāti) is the sole and sufficient basis for grammatical reference, with the individual form (vyakti) playing no essential role.'
Why rejected: Directly contradicts the commentary's assertion that 'rule-stated language requires an apparatus of types and tokens' — an irreducible coordination. Denying vyakti's role violates the apparatus structure both reported positions affirm. -/
def jati_monopoly : Reading :=
{ claims := [ Claim.predication "sufficient_alone" jati ] }
theorem jati_monopoly_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate jati_monopoly := by decide
#guard contract.licenses jati_monopoly = false
/- 'The individual form (vyakti) and the class (jāti) play interchangeable roles in grammatical reference, or are functionally equivalent.'
Why rejected: The verse's force rests on distinguishing two positions: position 1 assigns vyakti and jāti different roles (vyakti as name, jāti as connected operator), while position 2 assigns them mediated roles (vyakti as named-through-jāti). Conflating them erases the reported distinction, which the commentary emphasizes as the 'akrti/vyakti controversy'. -/
def conflated_positions : Reading :=
{ claims := [ Claim.identity vyakti jati ] }
theorem conflated_positions_inadequate : ¬ contract.Adequate conflated_positions := by decide
#guard contract.licenses conflated_positions = false
end Counterexamples
end VakyaVallari.Verses.V1_68_69