Irregularity of avagraha has sometimes confused great scholars like Whitney. While editing the Śaunakīyā Caturādhyāyikā on the basis of a single available manuscript, Whitney found a rule एकेस्पृष्टं in the manuscript. The two previous rules described the prayatna in the pronunciation of spirants and vowels [ऊष्मणां विवृतं च, स्वराणां च]. These rules described the effort involved in these two types of sounds as
vivr̥ta "open". Then came the rule एकेस्पृष्टं which Whitney translated as "some consider it as forming a contact." He then commented that this view is "too obviously and grossly incorrect, one would think, to be worth quoting." Ever since I read Whitney's edition and his comments, I had a feeling that the original rule must have been एकेऽस्पृष्टं. The prayatna of vowels is described as being अस्पृष्ट in many sources, and the Śaunakīya Caturādhyāyikā was making a presentation of the
vivr̥ta view and the
aspr̥ṣṭa view as alternatives. This was later justified by my examination of many other manuscripts that did use the sign of
avagraha. So the reading in my edition reads एकेऽस्पृष्टम्.
Madhav M. Deshpande
Professor Emeritus
Sanskrit and Linguistics
University of Michigan
[Residence: Campbell, California]